NURTW: Lawyer drags MC Oluomo, LASG, 8 Others to court over union levies

A lawyer, Olukoya Ogungbeje, has dragged the suspended the chairman of the Lagos State Chapter of National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) Alhaji Musilu Akinsanya, a.k.a. MC Oluomo, Lagos State government and eight others before a Lagos Federal High Court, over collection of levies from drivers that are not members of the union.

Others listed as Oluomo’s co-respondents in the suit marked FHC/L/CS/224/2022 are: Registered Trustees of NURTW; Registered Trustees of Road Transport Employers Association of Nigeria (RTEAN); Registered Trustees of Nigerian Association of Road Transport Owners (NARTO); Alhaji Lawal Yusuf Othman; Attorney-General of Lagos State; Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and Director of State Service (DSS).

Ogungbeje filed the suit for himself and on behalf of a new transport union, Transport Union Society of Nigeria (TUSON), pursuant to section 33, 36, 40, and 46 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; Order 4, Rules 3; 4(4)(5) and 11 of the fundamental rights enforcement procedure rules, 2009.

The motion exparte was supported with 34 paragraphs affidavit deposed to by the lawyer.

Moving the suit’s exparte motion, Ogungbeje asked the court for an order restraining the Respondents jointly and severally, whether by themselves, their agents, officials, servants, privies, officers and/or whosoever called from forceful imposition, collection, extortion, further forceful imposition, extortion and collection of any transport Union levies. dues, fees or monies, motor-parks levies, dues, fees or monies, bus-stop levies, dues. fees or monies, vehicle garage levies, dues, fees or monies or any transport union monies, dues or levies from any person, commercial vehicle driver and or transporter that is not a member of the respondents in connection with the facts of this case pending the hearing and determination of the substantive originating motion filed before this court.

He also asked the court for an order restraining Lagos State government and it’s  Attorney-General, jointly and severally, whether by themselves, their ministries, organs, agents, officials. servants, privies, officials, officers and/or howsoever called from further enforcement and or implementation of the N800 transport union levy due and money imposed on every transporter and commercial vehicle driver in Lagos State commenced on the 1st of February 2022, in connection with the facts of this case pending the hearing and determination of the substantive  originating motion filed before this court.

He also asked the court for an order restraining all the respondents jointly and severally, whether by themselves, their agents, officials, servants, privies, officers and or howsoever called from arresting, detaining, harassing, embarrassing, humiliating, inviting, seizing and confiscating any commercial vehicle, disturbing and or interfering with the lawful transport business operations of the applicant and his transport union members in connection with the facts of this case pending the hearing and determination of the substantive originating motion filed before the court.

Justice Lifu after listened to Ogungbeje’s submissions, ordered all the respondents in the suit to show cause within seven days from today or from the day they were served with the application, why the orders sought for should not be granted.

The judge adjourned the matter till May 24, 2022, for further hearing.

Ogungbeje in his affidavit claimed to be the Interim National Chairman of TUSON, an association of Transport Unions in Nigeria and that by virtue of his call to the Nigerian Bar and having sworn to uphold the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in line with Rule 1 of the Rules of professional conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria, he has a duty as a Minister in the Temple of Justice and Legal Practitioner to protect and defend the sanctity of the provisions of the Constitution from any constitutional contravention or infraction, violation and breach. And that his fundamental right to freedom of association guaranteed under section 40 of the Constitution has been and is being violated by the Respondents.