FALANA, SAN
Six years after the Oyo State Government wielded the big stick against the National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW), the Court of Appeal sitting in Ibadan has finally drawn the curtain on a long legal drama — declaring the 2019 suspension of the union’s activities by Governor Seyi Makinde as unlawful, unconstitutional, and unjustifiable.
The judgment, delivered by a three-man panel of the appellate court, not only vindicated the union but also reaffirmed a core democratic principle: that the powers of a state governor, however wide, must operate within the law.
How It All Began:
On May 31, 2019 — barely a day after assuming office — Governor Makinde announced the proscription of NURTW in Oyo State. The government cited “breach of peace” and “public safety concerns” as justification for taking over all motor parks in the state.
To many residents, the move seemed like an attempt to restore calm after years of violent clashes among transport union factions. But to the NURTW, it was a political ambush and a blatant attack on trade union freedom guaranteed under federal law.
Determined to fight back, the union approached the National Industrial Court in 2021, seeking to nullify the proscription. That case, however, ended in disappointment when the court dismissed it in March 2022 for lack of merit.
The Road to Appeal
Refusing to back down, the NURTW, through its counsel, Mr. Femi Falana, SAN, filed an appeal in April 2022.
Falana’s argument was simple yet potent: Governor Makinde had no legal authority to suspend or proscribe a trade union that is duly registered under the Trade Union Act, CAP T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria — a law squarely under the federal government’s exclusive legislative list.
He further faulted the lower court for failing to consider all issues raised by the union, describing the omission as a miscarriage of justice.
“The governor cannot take over the role of the National Assembly or the Registrar of Trade Unions,” Falana told the appellate court, adding that the state’s action amounted to an infringement of the union’s constitutional rights.
The State’s Defence:
The Oyo State Government, represented by Attorney-General Abiodun Aikomo, defended the suspension as a “necessary step” to prevent chaos and ensure public safety.
According to him, the decision was taken following reports of violent clashes among rival transport workers’ factions shortly after the new administration came into power.
But Falana countered the claim, insisting that the government provided no concrete evidence of any breakdown of law and order to justify such a sweeping measure.
Court’s Verdict: No Proof of Violence, No Legal Justification
In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Kenneth Ikechukwu Amadi, the appellate court faulted the government’s reasoning and overturned the suspension.
“Nowhere in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents at the lower court did they aver that the conduct of the appellant warranted suspension on grounds of breach of peace,” Justice Amadi held.
“I therefore hold that the respondents failed to justify the suspension of the activities of the appellant. I allow this appeal and set aside both the suspension of the NURTW and the judgment of the lower court.”
In a concurring opinion, Justice Biobele Abraham Georgewill sharply criticized the state government’s approach, warning that the rule of law cannot be sacrificed for administrative convenience.
“If the appellant’s activities were indeed violent,” he said, “the state had lawful means to restore order through the police and security agencies — not by resorting to illegality through suspension of the union.”
A Victory for Labour and the Law
For the NURTW, the ruling marks the end of a long and bruising legal battle that had kept its Oyo chapter under lock and key for years.
It also stands as a landmark precedent affirming that trade union affairs remain under federal control — not state discretion.
Labour observers and legal analysts have hailed the judgment as a reminder that constitutional boundaries exist even in matters of public order.
By restoring the NURTW’s right to operate, the Court of Appeal has effectively reaffirmed the supremacy of the law over executive powers — and reminded state governments that peace cannot be built on illegality.
