Professor Pat Utomi, a leading Nigerian political economist and public intellectual, has strongly condemned the administration of President Bola Tinubu, describing the government’s recent lawsuit against him as “an act of cowardice.” The lawsuit, filed by the Department of State Services (DSS) at the Federal High Court in Abuja, accuses Utomi of attempting to undermine the executive authority of the Tinubu administration by establishing a so-called “shadow government.”
The case, formally referenced as FHC/ABJ/CS/937/2025, alleges that Utomi’s initiative poses a significant threat to Nigeria’s constitutional democracy and national security. The DSS claims that the shadow government is an illegal parallel governance structure, designed to replicate executive functions without any constitutional backing.
In a defiant response shared on social media, Professor Utomi denounced the lawsuit and the broader government approach to dissent. He stated, “To stifle freedom of expression and bully civilized expression of difference is an act of cowardice and treachery to the constitution of Nigeria. What many people cannot figure out is how we got here. However we did, patriots from the six zones of Nigeria must rise to reject this.”
The lawsuit describes the shadow cabinet as an unregistered entity, with key roles including an Ombudsman and Good Governance portfolio led by Dele Farotimi, a Policy Delivery Unit staffed by prominent figures such as Oghene Momoh, Cheta Nwanze, Daniel Ikuonobe, Halima Ahmed, David Okonkwo, and Obi Ajuga, as well as a Council of Economic Advisers. The DSS alleges this setup attempts to function as an unauthorized government, undermining the legitimacy of Nigeria’s elected leadership.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Akinlolu Kehinde is representing Utomi in the case, challenging the DSS’s claims and emphasizing the right to free speech and political activism guaranteed by Nigeria’s Constitution.
The DSS further warned that such parallel governance structures could escalate political instability, exacerbate ethnic and regional tensions, and fuel separatist agitations. Citing Sections 1(1), 1(2), and 14(2)(a) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, the agency insisted that only democratically and lawfully established bodies hold legitimacy in Nigeria’s political system.
An affidavit filed by the DSS included intelligence reports warning that Utomi’s shadow government constitutes a “clear and present danger” to national stability. Despite government interventions, including direct warnings from the Minister of Information, the DSS claimed Utomi has persisted with the initiative.
The lawsuit seeks a court declaration that the shadow government is unconstitutional, null, and void. It also requests a perpetual injunction barring Utomi and his associates from establishing or operating any such parallel structure in the future.
In the wider political discourse, former presidential candidate and activist Omoyele Sowore weighed in on the controversy during an interview on Channels Television’s Inside Sources. While Sowore criticized the shadow government as lacking tangible impact, he supported efforts to raise awareness about Nigeria’s socio-political challenges.
“How do you replace a shadow government with another set of shadowy figures?” Sowore questioned. “I won’t fault anyone trying to offer solutions that raise public awareness but I don’t believe creating a so-called shadow government with a list of self-appointed individuals makes any real impact.”
As of now, the Federal High Court has not scheduled a date for hearing the case, but the controversy continues to stir intense public debate about governance, freedom of expression, and the role of civil society in Nigeria’s democracy.