•DSS operatives and Prof. Pat Utomi
The Department of State Services (DSS) has sued Prof Patrick Utomi over his shadow government proposal.
In the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/937/2025 and filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja with Utomi as the sole defendant, the secret police is contending that the move by the development economist was intended to create chaos and destabilise Nigeria, reports The Nation.
The DSS, in the suit filed by a team of lawyers, led by Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), argued that, “not only is the planned shadow government an aberration, it constitutes a grave attack on the Constitution and a threat to the democratically elected government that is currently in place”.
It expressed concern that such a structure, styled as a “shadow government, if left unchecked, may incite political unrest, cause intergroup tensions, and embolden other unlawful actors or separatist entities to replicate similar parallel arrangements, all of which pose a grave threat to national security.”
The plaintiff wants the court to declare the purported “shadow government” or “shadow cabinet” being planned by Utomi and his associates as “unconstitutional and amounts to an attempt to create a parallel authority not recognised by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
The DSS is also seeking a declaration that “under Sections 1(1), 1(2) and 14(2)(a) of the Constitution, the establishment or operation of any governmental authority or structure outside the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) is unconstitutional, null, and void.”
The DSS wants the court “to issue an order of perpetual injunction, restraining Utomi, his agents and associates “from further taking any steps towards the establishment or operation of a ‘shadow government’, ‘shadow cabinet’ or any similar entity not recognised by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
Utomi, who proposed the idea, at the weekend made a clarification when he appeared on a national television programme.
Speaking from United States on Saturday, Utomi told the station that his proposal is just a bringing together of like minds to review major policies of the government and proffer alternative positions.
Among the grounds on which the plaintiff is hinging its prayers includes that Section 1(1) of the Constitution declares its supremacy and binding force on all persons and authorities in Nigeria.
It added that Section 1(2) prohibits the governance of Nigeria or any part thereof except in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
According to the DSS, Section 14(2Xa) states that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, from whom government through the Constitution derives all its powers and authority.
It is contending that Utomi’s proposed shadow government lacks constitutional recognition and authority, thereby contravening the aforementioned provisions.
The plaintiff further stated, in a supporting affidavit, that it is the principal domestic intelligence and security agency of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, statutorily mandated to detect and prevent threats to the internal security of Nigeria, including subversive activities capable of undermining national unity, peace and constitutional order.
The DSS added that it is statutorily empowered to safeguard the internal security of Nigeria and prevent any threats to the lawful authority of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Its constituent institutions.
It states that it has monitored, “through intelligence reports and open source material, public statements and interviews granted by the defendant, Professor Patrick Utomi, in which he announced the purported establishment of what he termed a ‘shadow government’ or ‘shadow cabinet’, ‘comprising of several persons that make up its ‘ministers.’
“The ‘shadow government’ or ‘shadow cabinet’ is an unregistered and unrecognised body claiming to operate as an alternative government, contrary to the provision of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“The defendant (Utomi), through public statements, social media, and other platforms, has announced the formation of this body with the intent to challenge the legitimacy of the democratically elected government of Nigeria.
“While inaugurating the ‘shadow cabinet’, the defendant stated that it is made up of the Ombudsman and Good Governance portfolio to be manned by Dele Farotimi; the policy Delivery Unit team consisting of Oghene Momoh, Cheta Nwanze, Daniel Ikuonobe, Halima Ahmed, David Okonkwo and Obi Ajuga: and the council of economic advisers.
“Based on the intelligence gathered by the plaintiff, the activities and statements made by the defendant and his associates are capable of misleading segments of the Nigerian public, weakening confidence in the legitimacy of the elected government, and fuelling public disaffection,” it said.
The DSS further states that it is particularly, concerned that such a structure, styled as a ‘shadow government,’ if left unchecked, may incite political unrest, cause intergroup tensions, and embolden other unlawful actors or separatist entities to replicate similar parallel arrangements, all of which pose a grave threat to national security.
It further said: “The plaintiff, in the discharge of its statutory duties, has gathered intelligence confirming that the defendant’s actions pose a clear and present danger to Nigeria’s constitutional democracy.
“The defendant’s actions amount to an attempt to usurp or mimic executive authority, contrary to sections 1(1), 1{2), and 14(2Xa) of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended), which exclusively vests governance in institutions duly created under the Constitution and through democratic elections.”
The federal government has made several efforts to engage the defendant to dissuade him from this unconstitutional path, including statements made by the Minister of Information, but the defendant has remained defiant.
“It is in the interest of justice, national security, and the rule of law for this honourable court to declare the existence and operations of the defendant unconstitutional and illegal.”
The suit filed on May 13 is yet to be assigned to any judge for hearing.
