The Incorporated Trustees of Prince and Princess Charles Offokaja Foundation, Nigeria, and Prince and Princess Charles Offokaja Foundation, Switzerland lawsuit against the Federal Republic of Nigeria, were all rejected in a ruling delivered by Hon. Justice Sengu Mohamed Koroma on Friday, February 14.
The case of two NGOs’ alleged human rights breaches was ruled inadmissible by the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which cited the NGOs’ inability to file a public interest complaint.
The Honourable Justices Sengu Mohamed Koroma (Presiding & Judge Rapporteur), Dupe Atoki (Member), and Edward Amoako Asante (Member) comprised the panel that gave the ruling.
The NGOs, represented by their agent Charles Offokaja, brought the action, which was filed under suit number ECW/CCJ/APP25/23, the Court’s Communications Division said in a statement released on Friday.
The applicants claimed that Nigeria had breached the fundamental rights of its residents by neglecting to build a dam in Adamawa State that would have lessened the impact of overflow from the Lagdo Dam in neighbouring Cameroon.
They claimed that because the dam’s construction was delayed, flooding had occurred, causing extensive damage, fatalities, evictions, and disruptions to educational and commercial activity in 14 states in Nigeria.
Additionally, they emphasized the disastrous effects of the 2012 and 2022 Lagdo Dam releases, which included property damage, health issues, and environmental difficulties.
The pre-feasibility study, which was carried out in 1982 as part of a larger project aimed at developing the water resources in the Benue Basin, was refuted by the Nigerian government.
According to the government, the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Cameroon and Nigeria focused on strengthening collaboration in the management of shared water resources.
It highlighted the actions it had taken to reduce flooding, such as constructing more dams and obtaining a Senate resolution in 2024 to enable the dredging of the Niger and Benue Rivers.
The Court upheld its jurisdiction to consider claims involving violations of human rights.
It came to the conclusion, nevertheless, that the Second Applicant, an NGO registered in Switzerland, lacked the legal ability to file a lawsuit with the Court.
ECOWAS Court accepted the First Applicant’s (a Nigerian-registered NGO) assertion that it was acting in the public interest, but concluded that the case did not satisfy the necessary standards for public interest litigation.
Although the applicants mentioned a wide group of victims—the Nigerian people—the court said it was hard to pinpoint or imagine the precise victims whose rights had allegedly been infringed.
ECOWAS Court dismissed the entire action, finding that the First Applicant lacked the ability to pursue the case in the public interest.
Justice Koroma stated, “The Court recalls that the requirement is that the class of victims in a public interest litigation even when indeterminable should be capable of being envisaged by the Court.”