A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered service of court documents on the 2007 presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Patrick Okedinachi Utomi (also known as Prof. Pat Utomi) in relation to a suit pending against over his announced plan to establish a shadow government in the country.
In the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/937/2025 filed by the Department of State Services (DSS) through a team of lawyers, led by Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), the Service argued that, not only is the planned shadow government an aberration, it constitutes a grave attack on the Constitution and a threat to the current democratically elected government.
On Wednesday, Justice James Omotosho granted an ex-parte motion argued by Kehinde for and order allowing service of court documents on Utomi, listed as the sole defendant, in his Lagos address by means of courier service.
The plaintiff gave Utomi’s Lagos address as: No. 6 Balarabe Musa Crescent, off Samuel Manuwa Street, Victoria Island, Lagos, State.
Justice Omotosho adjourned till June 25 for hearing, before which Utomi is expected to have filed his defence.
In the suit instituted on May 13, the DSS expressed concern that such a structure, styled as a ‘shadow government,’ if left unchecked, may incite political unrest, cause intergroup tensions, and embolden other unlawful actors or separatist entities to replicate similar parallel arrangements, all of which pose a grave threat to national security.”
The plaintiff wants the court to declare the purported “shadow government” or”‘shadow cabinet” being planned by Utomi and his associates as “unconstitutional and amounts to an attempt to create a parallel authority not recognized by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
The DSS is also seeking a declaration that “under Sections 1(1), 1(2) and 14(2)(a) of the Constitution, the establishment or operation of any governmental authority or structure outside the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). is unconstitutional, null, and void.”
The plaintiff wants the court to issue an order of perpetual injunction, restraining Utomi, his agents and associates “from further taking any steps towards the establishment or operation of a ‘shadow government,’ ‘shadow cabinet’ or any similar entity not recognized by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
Among the grounds on which the plaintiff is hinging its prayers includes that Section 1(1) of the Constitution declares its supremacy and binding force on all persons and authorities in Nigeria.
It added that Section 1(2) prohibits the governance of Nigeria or any part thereof except in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
According to the DSS, Section 14(2Xa) states that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, from whom government through the Constitution derives all its powers and authority.
It is contending that Utomi’s proposed shadow government lacks constitutional recognition and authority, thereby contravening the aforementioned provisions.
The plaintiff further stated, in a supporting affidavit, that it is the principal domestic intelligence and security agency of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, statutorily mandated to detect and prevent threats to the internal security of Nigeria, including subversive activities capable of undermining national unity, peace and constitutional order.
The DSS added that it is statutorily empowered to safeguard the internal security of Nigeria and prevent any threats to the lawful authority of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Its constituent institutions.
It states that it has monitored, “through intelligence reports and open source material, public statements and interviews granted by the defendant, Professor Patrick Utomi, in which he announced the purported establishment of what he temed a ‘shadow government’ or ‘shadow cabinet,’comprising of several persons that make up its ‘Minister.’
“The ‘shadow government’ or ‘shadow cabinet’ is an unregistered and unrecognized body claiming to operate as an alternative government. contrary to the provision of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“The defendant (Utomi), through public statements, social media, and other platforms, has announced the formation of this body with the intent to challenge the legitimacy of the democratically elected government of Nigeria.
“While inaugurating the ‘shadow cabinet’, the defendant stated that it ls made up of the Ombudsman and Good Governance portfolio to be manned by Dele Farotimi; the policy Delivery Unit team consisting of Oghene Momoh, Cheta Nwanze, Daniel Ikuonobe, Halima Ahmed, David Okonkwo and Obi Ajuga: and the council of economic advisers.
“Based on the intelligence gathered by the plaintiff, the activities and statements made by the defendant and his associates are capable of misleading segments of the Nigerian public, weakening confidence in the legitimacy of the elected government, and fuelling public disaffection,” it said.
The DSS further states that it is particularly, concerned that such a structure, styled as a ‘shadow government,’ if left unchecked, may incite political unrest, cause intergroup tensions, and embolden other unlawful actors or separatist entities to replicate similar parallel arrangements, all of which pose a grave threat to national security.
“The plaintiff, in the discharge of Its statutory duties, has gathered intelligence confirming that the defendant’s actions pose a clear and present danger to Nigeria’s constitutional democracy.
“The defendant’s actions amount to an attempt to usurp or mimic executive authority, contrary to sections 1(1), 1{2), and 14(2Xa) of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended), which exclusively vests governance in institutions duly created under the Consttution and through democratic elections.
“The Federal Government of Nigeria has made several efforts to engage the defendant to dissuade him from this unconstitutional path, including statements made by the Minister of Information, but the defendant has remained defiant.
“It is In the interest of justice, national security, and the rule of law for this honourable court to declare the existence and operations of the defendant unconstitutional and illegal,” it said.