The Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday refused the Nigerian Insurers Association (NIA) and 17 insurance companies’ request to temporarily restrain the House of Representatives and its Committee on Capital Market and Institutions from probing and recovering alleged N98.4billion liabilities against non-government-funded insurance companies in Nigeria.
Justice Emeka Nwite declined the ex parte application after it was moved by the plaintiffs’ lawyer, A.M. Kayode, on Wednesday.
Nairametrics previously reported that the NIA, in a press release, criticized the House of Representatives Committee on Capital Market and Institutions’ ongoing investigations into certain member companies (insurers) over alleged multibillion-naira financial infractions, alleging it raises concerns about “legislative overreach” by the lawmakers.
Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application
Professor Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, the plaintiff’s lead counsel, argued, in his motion ex parte seen by Nairametrics, that the NIA is the umbrella association of the 2nd to 18th Plaintiffs/Applicants (insurance companies), whose sole responsibility is to protect the interests of insurance companies in Nigeria.
Joined as respondents in the case are the Speaker, House of Representatives of the National Assembly, House of Representatives Committee on Capital Market and Institutions, Hon. Kwamoti B. Laori, and Hon. Bob Solomon.
Osipitan added that the 2nd to 18th Plaintiffs/Applicants are non-government-funded companies conducting insurance business in Nigeria and are allegedly under the supervision and control of agencies within the executive arm of government (National Insurance Commission, Corporate Affairs Commission, and Federal Inland Revenue Service).
The senior lawyer stated that his clients are “aggrieved” by the defendants’ actions in inviting/summoning them to submit operational documents with a view to establishing the Plaintiffs/Applicants’ alleged indebtedness to the Federal Government of Nigeria and enforcing payment.
He maintained that the Defendants lack the vires (powers) to invite or compel the attendance of the Plaintiffs/Applicants’ Chief Executive Officers/Managing Directors at its meetings and sessions, as it is allegedly outside the scope of the powers of the House of Representatives to request the Plaintiffs/Applicants to submit various regulatory and operational documents to the Defendants.
Professor Osipitan stated that the motion ex parte was necessary to prevent the alleged flagrant breach of the Constitution by the House of Representatives and its Committee.
In an affidavit supporting the motion ex parte, deposed to by Akioya Toyin Victoria, a manager in the NIA, the official disclosed that the “objective of these letters of invitation/summons to the 2nd to 18th Plaintiffs to sessions/proceedings of the 2nd Defendant is to recover N98.4 billion from the 2nd to 18th Plaintiffs/Applicants, being 2nd to 18th Plaintiffs’ established liabilities to the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
The official stated that while the Reps Committee appointed a consortium of consultants to review and audit publicly quoted insurance companies in Nigeria—purposely to determine their level of compliance with extant laws, regulations, and corporate governance standards governing Nigeria’s capital market and insurance industry—they have no oversight or investigative powers over the insurance companies regarding their compliance or non-compliance with legal, statutory, and regulatory instruments.
The official added that the Plaintiffs/Applicants stand the risk of their business being damaged or paralyzed if the ex parte application is refused by the Court.
What Transpired in Court
At the court session on Wednesday, A.M. Kayode, counsel for the plaintiffs, told Justice Emeka Nwite to grant his motion ex parte, which seeks to determine whether the House of Representatives has the power to query or invite the insurance companies in line with the aforementioned relevant laws.
- He explained in open court that the Reps Committee had invited the 2nd to 18th applicants (insurance companies officials) to appear before it on July 21, 2025, and they complied.
- He said that after this action was filed on July 18, advance copies of the court processes were sent to the defendants.
“Despite this, the Reps Committee proceeded to sit on July 24 and adjourned to August 4,” he added.
“We are worried about this kind of attitude, and that is why we do not want anything that will tamper with the res (subject matter of the pending case),” Kayode said.
- Nwite first granted Kayode’s application to hear the matter during the court’s ongoing annual vacation.
- Kayode then moved the motion ex parte, seeking the court’s indulgence to grant its prayers to temporarily restrain the House of Representatives.
Ruling on the motion ex parte, Nwite held that, having listened to the submission of the plaintiffs’ lawyer, “I am of the view and I so hold that the interest of justice will be met by putting the respondents (House of Representatives and others) on notice.”
- The judge subsequently “refused” the ex parte application by the NIA and other plaintiff applicants.
- The case was then adjourned to August 13 for hearing on the motion on notice.
Backstory
The NIA had stressed that it represents licensed insurance and reinsurance companies in Nigeria and has noted the recent press statement issued by the Committee on Capital Market and Institutions concerning ongoing investigations into certain member companies over alleged financial infractions.
This development follows reports that the House began probing 25 insurers on Monday over alleged non-remittance of multibillion-naira revenues owed to the Federal Government of Nigeria.
The NIA disclosed that the objective of approaching the Court is to seek judicial guidance on the legality, propriety, and constitutional limits of the Committee’s intervention in order to safeguard institutional integrity, uphold regulatory independence, and ensure that legislative oversight remains within the bounds of the law.
