Eight Suspended Ogun NUJ Members Challenge NEC Over ‘Non-Existent’ Constitutional Provision

Eight suspended members of the Ogun State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) have appealed what they described as an unconstitutional, arbitrary, and legally flawed disciplinary action imposed by the National Executive Council (NEC), accusing the union leadership of relying on a non-existent constitutional provision to justify their suspension.

In a formal petition submitted to the National Ethics and Disciplinary Committee through the National Secretary, the affected members described the suspension as a “constitutional catastrophe,” arguing that the NEC based its decision on “Article 7 (5d)” of the 2023 NUJ Constitution — a provision they insist does not exist in the union’s governing document.

According to the appellants, Article 7 of the NUJ Constitution contains only three sections dealing with the establishment of the Ethics Committee, procedural guidelines, and penalties, with no Section 5(d) anywhere in the document.

“One cannot suspend members under a phantom constitutional provision conjured from thin air. A disciplinary sanction founded on fiction rather than law is null, void, and of no effect,” the appellants stated.

The suspended members argued that the alleged constitutional defect renders the entire disciplinary process invalid and raises serious concerns about the procedural integrity of the NEC.

They further alleged that the NEC was either misled or deliberately denied access to the full details surrounding the Ogun NUJ electoral dispute, which stemmed from the controversial state triennial delegates’ conference held on December 11, 2025.

Among the grievances listed by the appellants were the alleged improper constitution of the Credentials Committee, electoral irregularities, constitutional breaches, arbitrary disqualification of qualified candidates, and violations relating to dues, nomination, and eligibility requirements.

The group maintained that they exhausted all available internal dispute resolution mechanisms — including petitions, protests, legal correspondence, and requests for dialogue — before any judicial intervention was initiated.

ADVERTISEMENT

The appellants also expressed concern over the inclusion of members who were reportedly not parties to any legal action, particularly Comrades Sekinat and Adejoke Adeleye.

Describing the suspension as “oppressive, unjust, and profoundly irresponsible,” they questioned the legality and motive behind sanctioning individuals with no direct involvement in the legal dispute.

The appeal also highlighted the case of Comrade Oluwole Shokunbi, a former two-term Chairman and former Secretary of the Ogun NUJ Council, who was allegedly disenfranchised despite meeting constitutional and financial requirements.

According to the appellants, his treatment reflects a broader erosion of democratic principles within the council and suggests the use of disciplinary mechanisms as tools for political vendetta.

The group is urging the National Ethics and Disciplinary Committee to immediately lift the suspension of all eight members, publicly exonerate and apologise to those wrongly affected, and prevent what they described as the future misuse of “imaginary constitutional provisions” for punitive purposes.

They stressed that the matter goes beyond individual suspensions and poses a direct challenge to the NUJ’s commitment to constitutional governance, fairness, and institutional credibility.

“If constitutional provisions can be fabricated to silence dissent, then no member of the Union is safe from arbitrary persecution,” the appellants said.

They concluded by urging the committee to uphold justice, transparency, and constitutional fidelity, warning that the NUJ must decide whether to remain a professional body governed by law or descend into institutional arbitrariness.