Court Halts Governor Alia's Executive Order on Public Gatherings in Benue

A High Court in Benue State, located in Makurdi, has invalidated an executive order issued by Governor Hyacinth Alia, deeming it an illegal and unconstitutional act that constitutes an abuse of executive authority.

Justice Theresa Igoche presided over the case, ruling in favour of a lawsuit initiated by Chief Bemgba Iortyom, the former State Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Benue, and Adebayo Ogorry from the Centre for Social Justice, Equity and Transparency (CESJET). The suit was filed against the Benue State Government and other respondents.

The court's judgment nullified the executive order, which Governor Alia had signed on February 28, 2024. This order required citizens to obtain permits from the Department of Public Order for rallies, wakes, and other public assemblies, and also imposed a curfew, restricting activities after 10 pm.

Justice Igoche dismissed preliminary objections raised by the state government and the Attorney-General, finding them to be without merit and based on technicalities that did not align with the principles of substantive justice.

In the main body of her ruling, the judge determined that the Public Order Act, which served as the basis for the governor's executive order, had previously been struck down by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the governor's directive lacked any legal standing.

The court granted all the requests made by the plaintiffs. It also issued a perpetual injunction, prohibiting the state government, its representatives, or anyone acting on its behalf from enforcing the executive order.

Furthermore, Justice Igoche declared the executive order null and void, stating that it was unreasonable, exceeded the governor's legal powers (ultra vires), and directly contravened the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The plaintiffs had initiated legal action in June 2024, contending that the governor's order infringed upon citizens' fundamental rights, including the freedoms of movement, association, and assembly. They argued that the order had been used to justify arbitrary business closures, arrests, and the disruption of public and religious events.