Following the NBM vs Edo State Gov: Read Update on First Court Sitting Over Alleged Unlawful Demolition of Secretariat
The Federal High Court sitting in Benin City today, 5th June 2025, held the preliminary hearing in the high-profile suit filed by the NBM of Africa against the Governor of Edo State and two others, over the alleged unlawful demolition of the NBM secretariat.
The lawsuit, filed under Suit No. FHC/13/CS/48/2025 challenges the alleged unlawful demolition of the NBM Secretariat, with serious claims of fundamental human rights violations.
The case, filed under suit number FHC/13/CS/48/2025, seeks the enforcement of fundamental human rights allegedly violated during the said demolition. The Applicants, led by Chief Reginald Asiuwhu, appeared in court alongside 26 other representatives, including:
1. Raphael Chukwuzubelu
2. Ikem Onyeka
3. C.E. Ojotule
4. S.W. Onoghwiegbe
5. Emmanuel Atowo
6. Chikwado Peter Enyigwe
7. Magnus Urueshone
8. Udoudom Chritain
9. Tsaku Ayaka Michael
10. Emeka Kingsley Anueyiagu
11. Peter Ajonye Samuel
12. Tobenna Kingsley Nwokwu
13. C.O. Ekumankama
14. O.J. Edegba
15. E.O. Uhunamure
16. L.O. Eze
17. H.J. Momodu
18. Uwa Okoh
19. Paul Badairi
20. E. Ehijele
21. Emeka Chigbo
22. Irunoje Garuba
23. A. Akhere
24. L. Omorodion
25. A.C. Okhademeh
26. I.J. Andrew Imiefoh (Mrs)
The 1st Defendant, the Governor of Edo State, was represented by a legal team led by H.A. Bello, SAN, and J.E. Ogagaworia. The 2nd Defendant was represented by O.C. Igbinedion, while the 3rd Defendant had no legal representation in court.
The court bailiff confirmed that all parties had been duly served, though he admitted misplacing the proof of service for the 3rd Defendant.
Both the 1st and 2nd Defendants acknowledged service of the application. Counsel to the 1st Defendant, H.A. Bello, SAN, informed the court that he was only briefed by his client on June 3, 2025, despite service being effected on May 23, 2025. Similarly, counsel for the 2nd Defendant stated that he was also briefed on the same date.
The presiding judge expressed dissatisfaction with the late briefing and lack of preparedness by the defendants’ counsel. Following an application for adjournment by the learned silk to enable the respondents to file their responses, the matter was adjourned to June 16, 2025, for definite hearing.
The court emphasized that the next hearing will proceed without delay, and all responses must be filed before the adjourned date.
