By Aisha Muhammad Magaji
A Federal High Court in Abuja has legally barred Professor Pat Utomi from proceeding with his plan to establish a so-called “shadow government,” describing the initiative as unconstitutional and a potential threat to national security.
The ruling, delivered by Justice James Omotosho, comes after the Department of State Services (DSS) filed a suit seeking to restrain Utomi and his associates from forming any parallel government structure. The DSS argued that such an initiative could mislead citizens, destabilize governance, and contravene the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Justice Omotosho, in his judgment, emphasized that the Nigerian Constitution does not recognize shadow or parallel governments. “The Nigerian Constitution makes no provision for a shadow government. Any attempt to form one is therefore illegal and void,” he stated. The court cited Sections 1(1) and 2(2) of the 1999 Constitution, highlighting the supremacy of Nigeria’s democratic structures and the illegality of parallel governance schemes.
According to court records, the DSS contended that Utomi’s plan undermined Nigeria’s presidential system and posed a direct threat to peace and stability. The agency claimed that public promotion of an alternative government could incite confusion and weaken citizens’ trust in the legitimate governance system.
Utomi’s legal team, however, argued that the suit infringed upon constitutionally protected rights, including freedom of expression, association, and political participation. They claimed that creating alternative political structures for advocacy purposes was within legal bounds.
Justice Omotosho dismissed these arguments, clarifying that constitutional rights do not extend to activities that are unlawful or threaten national security. The judgment effectively prohibits Utomi and his collaborators from pursuing the shadow government initiative.
Legal analysts suggest that the ruling sets a clear precedent regarding limits on political activism in Nigeria. Professor Utomi, a well-known political economist and former presidential aspirant, has historically been active in civil society advocacy, but this decision underscores the judiciary’s stance on maintaining constitutional governance structures.
“The court’s decision reinforces the principle that advocacy must operate within the confines of the law. While citizens are free to critique government policies, they cannot establish parallel governmental bodies,” said Dr. Chukwuma Eze, a constitutional law expert at the University of Lagos.
Public reactions have been mixed. Supporters of Utomi argue that the shadow government concept was intended to provide checks and balances on perceived inefficiencies in governance, especially regarding economic and social reforms. Critics, however, contend that any alternative government initiative risks creating political confusion, undermining democratic legitimacy, and potentially escalating social unrest.
The DSS welcomed the ruling, noting that it “reaffirms Nigeria’s constitutional order and ensures that governance remains unified under legally recognized institutions.”
Nigeria operates a presidential system of government, modeled on the separation of powers principle. Any attempt to create parallel structures is considered incompatible with the Constitution and can trigger legal sanctions. The 1999 Constitution explicitly vests executive authority in the President and federally recognized institutions, leaving no room for unofficial governmental bodies.
The court’s decision is final, but legal observers note that Utomi could explore other constitutional avenues to engage in policy advocacy without contravening national law. Experts advise political activists to channel efforts through recognized platforms such as civil society organizations, policy think tanks, and parliamentary advocacy, ensuring compliance with legal frameworks.
