Court Stops NLC, TUC From Going Ahead With Strike

[TGD]

 • NLC, TUC Kick, Insist On Strike

• Agbakoba Urges Respect For Order

• Security Beef Up In Abuja

THE  National Industrial Court (NIC) yesterday issued an interim order restraining the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress(TUC) from embarking on a nationwide strike next Monday in protest of the withdrawal of fuel  subsidy.

Meanwhile, the NLC and TUC have faulted the injunctions, insisting on the planned strike on Monday.

In Abuja yesterday, apparently to drum support  for the removal of fuel subsidy, some people besieged the Labour House headquarters of the NLC, which the union described as invasion sponsored by government.

In his reaction, the former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Olisa Agbakoba, (SAN) said he was just studying the order, which is subject to several interpretations.

He however said that the order was made against the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) and not the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) or other human rights groups and associations.

When asked if it would not be proper for NLC and TUC to suspend the Monday strike in obedience of the court order and in the spirit of the rule of law, Agbakoba answered that 'it would be the ideal thing to do if only government can use the period of suspension of the strike iron out the very issues it supposed have addressed before announcing the removal of the fuel subsidy.

President of the court (NIC), Justice Babatunde Adejumo made the order following an exparte application brought on behalf government by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN) praying the court to restrain NLC and TUC from embarking on the mass protest / strike action.

In his ruling, Adejumo granted an order restraining the defendants from embarking or inciting the general public to embark on general strikes, street  protests, mass rallies or any other action that would be inimical to the economic affairs of the Federal Republic of Nigeria pending the determination of the motion on Notice.

The court therefore adjourned till January 12 for hearing of the motion on notice.

It also granted an order of substituted service of the process on the respondent through national dailies.

The claimant had through their counsel, Fabian Ajogwu (SAN) prayed the court for an order restraining the defendants from embarking or compelling other persons to embark on a strike action or general strikes, mass rallies and street protest across Nigeria pending the determination of the Motion on Notice.

It further prayed for an order restraining the defendants from interfering with the exercise of the constitutional powers of the executive arm of the Federal Government of Nigeria in the allocation and use of scarce resources of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, including but not limited to the transfer of resources previously allocated to the subsidy of premium motor spirit among others for the medium and long term socio-economic benefit of present and future generations of Nigerians.

Also, the claimant wants an order restraining the defendants from interfering in any way with the executive implementation of the 2012 Appropriation Act and other connected duties of the Executive Arm of the Federal Government of Nigeria in the management of the economic affairs of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The Federal Government also wants the court to restrain the defendants from embarking and/or inciting the Nigerian citizenry and the general public to embark on general strikes, street protests, mass rallies or any other action that would be inimical to the economic affairs of the Federal Republic of Nigeria pending the determination of the Motion on Notice.

Moreover, the claimant wants an order granting leave to the claimant to serve the respondents with the originating processes in the matter vide substituted means .

In a 30 paragraph affidavit of urgency deposed to by one Yusuf Mok, a counsel in the office of the Attorney General of the Federation AGF averred that the removal of subsidy is not a dispute of right of the defendants or their members adding that the defendants did not also raise any dispute arising from a collective and fundamental breach of contract employment on their part.

He further averred that the defendants have not submitted any dispute to arbitration nor served the claimant with a notice of arbitration, adding that the  call for strike by the defendant was made without formal declaration of a dispute relating to labour relations or employee rights.

The Federal Government also averred that the defendants did not conduct any ballot in accordance with the rules and Constitution of the trade union at which simple majority of all registered members were given opportunity to vote on whether or not to go on strike.

The claimant therefore stated that unless the court stopped the strike the defendants would interfere with the executive implementation of the 2012 Appropriation Act adding that the defendants will also take action that will breach the peace and interference with the maintenance of law, among others.

It also claimed that the country would loose a huge income if the strike were not stopped adding that the bilateral agreement, which the country has entered with other neighboring countries adding that a great economic damage will be done on the nation.

Counsel to the claimant, Mathew   Echo had earlier argued that if the application is  granted, the respondents have nothing to lose stating that the claimant has everything to lose if the prayer is not granted.

He added that if the prayer were not allowed, it would affect the security of the nation adding that it will be in the interest and stability of the country if the prayer is granted.

He there prayed the court to grant the application.

TUC president general, Peter Esele, after much pressure, said: "Is the court telling us that we don't have the right to withdraw their services.

"Under the Nigeria Constitution, that right is guaranteed and if Nigerian workers are unanimous in withdrawing their services, I don't see anybody questioning that right."

NLC, in a press statement signed by its Acting General Secretary, Owei Lakemfa, urged Nigerians to ignore the injunction.

The statement read: "The NLC is not aware of any such injunction, we were not served any paper of court appearance. We were not present in court, nor were we represented in any capacity.

"Also, the NLC was not served any court summons, nor were we served any court order.

"The cretins in the administration imagine that by seeking to drag the judiciary in the mud, they can avert the general strikes, rallies and mass protests that will begin on Monday, January.

"They cannot make the simple analysis that the whole populace is angry and that Nigerians do not need any group to ask them to protest an evil policy that seeks to impoverish them."

It added: "The NLC asks Nigerians to ignore this ploy and rumour; there is no going back on next week's protests and shutdown.

"The issue of the strikes, protests and against an obnoxious policy is not and industrial relations one; it is not between an employer and an employee. Rather, it is one between the Nigerian people versus the government.

"So, if the issue was taken before the National Industrial Court, then it is the wrong place to shop for injunction. To obtain an injunction from a court that has no competent jurisdiction is to try playing ping-pong with the judiciary."

According to NLC: "Labour reiterates that the constitutional and fundamental right of Nigerians to protest cannot be annulled.

The NLC asks Nigerians to ignore such rumours; the strikes, mass rallies and protests will go on as scheduled.

"The NLC advises the Jonathan administration to listen to the people or face their justifiable wrath."



The Guardian