A civil society organisation, the Registered Trustees of Empowerment and Welfare Development Initiative for Unemployed Youths (RTEWDIUY), has approached the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, seeking to nullify a vote of confidence passed by the House of Representatives in favour of Pipeline Infrastructure Nigeria Limited (PINL) and its Managing Director, Osahon Okunbor.
The organisation is also seeking the suspension of PINL’s pipeline surveillance contract, an investigation into the company’s operations and financial dealings, and a review of its business relationship with the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).
A member of the organisation and legal practitioner, Barrister Jonas Idowu, disclosed this in a statement issued to journalists in Abuja on Saturday.
Idowu said the suit was filed in the interest of transparency and accountability, particularly regarding the management of the pipeline surveillance contract and the circumstances surrounding the House of Representatives’ endorsement of the company.
He said the action sought the suspension of the contract, an investigation into Okunbor and a review of the terms of the company’s oil-related dealings with NNPCL, alongside the nullification of the lawmakers’ vote of confidence.
The defendants in the suit include PINL, Okunbor, NNPCL, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the House of Representatives.
According to Idowu, the claimant filed a Motion Ex Parte pursuant to Order 42 of the High Court of the FCT (Civil Procedure) Rules 2025, Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution and the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
The application seeks interim orders suspending the pipeline surveillance contract pending the hearing and determination of a Motion on Notice.
The organisation is also asking the court to direct relevant law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies, including the EFCC, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the police, to investigate PINL and its managing director over their activities in connection with the contract.
The proposed investigation would cover the company’s operations, management, financial position and expenditure, as well as allegations of money laundering and other financial improprieties.
The court processes reportedly raise allegations of financial mismanagement, ineffectiveness, personal aggrandisement, diversion and misappropriation of funds, living above legitimate means and economic sabotage in connection with the contract.
The allegations have not been established by a court, and the suit remains subject to judicial determination.
Beyond seeking the suspension of the existing contract, RTEWDIUY wants the court to restrain the Presidency, NNPCL and other relevant authorities from renewing or re-awarding the contract to PINL or any company acting on its behalf pending the determination of the substantive application.
The organisation is also challenging the legality of the vote of confidence reportedly passed by the House of Representatives’ Committee on Host Communities in favour of PINL and its managing director.
Idowu argued that the resolution was unconstitutional, exceeded the powers of the House and had no legal effect. He also questioned the transparency of the proceedings that led to the endorsement.
The claimant is asking the court to set aside the resolution and grant any other reliefs it considers appropriate.
Pipeline surveillance contracts are central to efforts to protect Nigeria’s oil and gas infrastructure against crude oil theft, pipeline vandalism and other forms of economic sabotage. Their implementation also has implications for national oil production, government revenue and the security of critical petroleum assets.
The suit comes amid continued efforts to protect oil infrastructure and boost production in the Niger Delta, where pipeline surveillance arrangements have attracted public scrutiny over their effectiveness, cost and accountability.
Idowu expressed optimism that the court would consider the reliefs sought in accordance with the applicable rules and procedures.
He, however, acknowledged that the filing of the suit did not establish the allegations against the defendants, stressing that the issues raised remained for the court to determine