Naijafavourite
The National Industrial Court has ruled in favor of the Federal Government (FG) in a case brought by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) over the creation of two new academic trade unions. The court recognized the Congress of Nigerian University Academics (CONUA) and the National Association of Medical and Dental Academics (NAMDA) as trade unions in Nigerian universities. ASUU had argued that it was unconstitutional for the Registrar of the Trade Union to create unions with similar functions. However, the court held that there can be multiple trade unions within employment, dismissing ASUU’s claims.
After a lengthy legal battle at the National Industrial Court, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and the Federal Government (FG) reached a verdict yesterday. The court ruled in favor of the FG, confirming the establishment of two new trade unions in Nigerian universities.
According to the court’s order, the Congress of Nigerian University Academics (CONUA) and the National Association of Medical and Dental Academics (NAMDA) will now be recognized as official trade unions in Nigerian universities.
The lawsuit was filed by ASUU on June 26, 2022, against the Minister of Labour and Employment, the Registrar of Trade Union, CONUA, and NAMDA. ASUU argued that the creation of trade unions with similar objectives within the same jurisdiction was unconstitutional, citing relevant sections of the Nigerian constitution and Trade Union Act.
The defendants, on the other hand, countered ASUU’s claims, stating that the issues raised were speculative and academic. CONUA also questioned the legality of their registration.
In delivering the judgment, Justice Benedict Kanyip held that multiple trade unions can exist within employment, citing the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Act. The court also dismissed ASUU’s argument against the registration of CONUA and NAMDA, stating that the Trade Union Act allows for the existence of other trade unions.
Furthermore, the court found that ASUU’s evidence against the approval of CONUA’s registration was sourced from an online publication, which the fourth defendant claimed was hearsay evidence. The court allowed the evidence to be admitted.
The court also ruled that the fourth defendant was not registered as a trade union until January 11, 2023, and ASUU did not provide evidence when it filed the suit on June 26, 2022. Additionally, the court noted that ASUU had misnamed the fourth defendant, but stated that a suit can proceed even with a misnamed juristic entity.
Finally, the court concluded that ASUU cannot claim exclusive jurisdiction over the matter and failed to show any encroachment on its jurisdictional scope by others. The court emphasized that the second defendant did not assert any exclusive rights in its schedule.
