The legal shield protecting the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) from labor unrest has shattered.
In a high-stakes ruling, the Court of Appeal has effectively nullified the impact of the National Industrial Court’s injunction, clearing the path for FCT workers to down tools and continue their strike despite a series of aggressive warnings from Minister Nyesom Wike.
The Ruling: A Jurisdictional “Error in Law”
The appellate court’s intervention hinges on a scathing critique of the initial legal proceedings. Counsel for the labor unions successfully argued that the lower court overreached in its attempt to muzzle the workforce.
Ground One of the appeal was the knockout blow. The appellants argued that the learned trial judge erred in law when he granted an order of interlocutory injunction restraining them from industrial action without proper jurisdiction
They argued that the trial judge committed a fundamental Error in Law by granting an interlocutory injunction while lacking the proper jurisdiction to do so.
”You cannot build a house on a non-existent foundation,” a legal representative for the workers stated.
”By restraining industrial action without first resolving the jurisdictional authority of the court, the lower court committed a reversible error that infringed on the constitutional rights of the employees.”
Wike’s Iron Fist Meets Labor’s Resolve:
The ruling marks a significant setback for Minister Nyesom Wike, who has maintained a hardline “no-nonsense” stance since taking office. Wike had previously threatened striking workers with summary dismissal and the withholding of salaries, relying on the now-stayed court order to label the strike illegal.
With the legal barrier removed, the Joint Union Action Committee (JUAC) has directed all members to vacate their posts. The strike has already begun to bite, with activities at the FCTA Secretariat in Area 11 grinding to a halt this morning.
Another Set Back For Wike As Court Of Appeal Stays Controversial National Industrial Court Injunction , Pending Determination of Substantive Appeal
