The Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) have asked the National Industrial Court, Abuja, to set aside its interim order that stopped the two workers’ bodies from embarking on their planned industrial action against the recent removal of fuel subsidy by the President Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration.

NLC and TUC in a Motion on Notice dated June 7 but filed June 8 by their lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN) are claiming that the suit by the Federal Government “as presently constituted and the reliefs sought offends the lucid provisions of Section 254C (1) (f) of the 1999 Constitution and Section 7(6) of the National Industrial Court Act 2006.

The Organised Labour had alerted their members for a nationwide strike slated for June 7 but later suspended in protest against the over 200 per cent increase in the pump price of petrol across the country following the removal of petrol subsidy.

Following the alert, the Federal Government through the office of the Attorney General of the Federation had approached the industrial court to intervene by stopping the strike.

Delivering ruling in the motion exparte, Justice O.Y. Anuwe on June 5, accordingly made an interim order of injunction “restraining the Defendants/Respondents, their members, their agents, employees, workmen, servants, proxies or affiliates from embarking on the planned Industrial Action and/or strike of any nature pending the hearing and determination of the Claimants/Applicants motion on notice for interlocutory injunction.”

But responding, the defendants claimed that they and their members have a right to strike under the Trade Unions Act, the Trade Disputes Act, the ILO Convention and under several international treaties the 1st Claimant/Applicant is a signatory to, urging the court to set aside the order.

“By virtue of Section 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, Nigerian workers have the fundamental right to protest against policies of government considered inimical to their interests,” NLC and TUC said, adding that, “the Plaintiff’s suit is lacking in bona fide, as it was filed to harass, irritate and embarrass the Defendants/Applicants, which constitutes an abuse of judicial process.”

While stating that the Federal Government suppressed material facts before the court and thereby misled the court in granting the exparte reliefs sought and obtained, the respondents argued that, “in the circumstances and under established judicial authorities as well as extant rules of the court, the claimant’s suit as presently constituted against the defendant is liable to be dismissed or struck out for want of jurisdiction and the ex parte order set aside.”

In a 16-paragraph affidavit in support of the Motion on Notice marked NICN/ABJ/158/2023, the defendants recalled that when former President Goodluck Jonathan abruptly removed subsidy on January 1, 2012, Mr. Bola Ahmed Tinubu (now GCFR) and other leaders of his party including General Muhammadu Buhari led the occupy Nigeria protest until the policy was reversed.

“The protesters of 2012 had insisted that the government must build (revamp) refineries, tackle corruption and cut costs before removing the subsidy of PMS.

“That in September 2020, an industrial dispute arose over the decision of the 1st Claimant/Applicant to deregulate the downstream oil sector of the petroleum industry inter alia.

“That Bi-Partite meeting to address and resolve the issues between the FGN and the 1st and 2nd Defendant/Applicant herein were held on September 15, 24 and 27, 2020.

“That in a bid to resolve the trade dispute inter partes, the parties to the dispute then (and the current trade dispute) signed a joint communiqué/agreement on Sunday 27th September 2020.

“Further to paragraph nine above, it was agreed that the NNPC (shall) expedite the rehabilitation of the nation’s four refineries located in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna and to achieve 50 per cent completion for Port Harcourt by December 2021, while timelines and delivery for Warri and Kaduna will be established by the inclusive Steering Committee.”

Deponent of the affidavit, Comrade Emmanuel Ugboaja, disclosed that to ensure commitment and transparency to the processes and timelines of the rehabilitation exercise, the management of NNPC had offered to integrate the national leadership of the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) and Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association (PENGASSAN) into the Steering Committee already established by the Corporation.

“That to our utmost chagrin, the Technical Committee which I was a member of never took off and government frustrated all the initiatives to give life to the agreement.

“That the agreements in Exhibit SA 1 was frustrated and only observed in breach.

“We were thus taken aback when the claimants without honouring the agreements in EXHIBIT SA1 decided to scrap subsidy without honouring previous agreements, which stipulated conditions precedent to such policy implementation of removing subsidy.

“That as a legal practitioner and trade unionist of over three decades, I know as a fact that this Honourable Court is an appellate body over trade disputes and such dispute must first go through the process of Part 1 of the TDA.

“That further to 12 above, I know as a fact that the claimants are bound to first refer the instant dispute trade to the Industrial Arbitration Tribunal (IAP) before approaching this Court,” they noted.