Eight suspended members of the Ogun State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) have formally appealed what they describe as an unconstitutional, arbitrary, and legally defective disciplinary action imposed by the National Executive Council (NEC), citing the shocking use of a nonexistent constitutional provision as the basis for their suspension.
In a strongly worded petition submitted to the National Ethics and Disciplinary Committee through the National Secretary, the affected members described the suspension as a “constitutional catastrophe,” arguing that the NEC anchored its decision on “Article 7 (5d)” of the 2023 NUJ Constitution — a provision they insist does not exist anywhere in the Union’s governing document.
According to the appellants, Article 7 of the NUJ Constitution contains only three sections covering the establishment of the Ethics Committee, procedural guidelines, and penalties, with no Section 5(d) in existence.
“One cannot suspend members under a phantom constitutional provision conjured from thin air. A disciplinary sanction founded on fiction rather than law is null, void, and of no effect,” the appeal stated.
The suspended members argue that this glaring legal defect renders the entire disciplinary process fundamentally invalid and raises disturbing questions about the procedural integrity of the NEC.
They further alleged that NEC was either grossly misled or deliberately shielded from the full facts surrounding the Ogun NUJ electoral disputes, which stemmed from the controversial state triennial delegates conference held on the 11th December 2025.
Their grievances reportedly included:
* Improper constitution of the Credentials Committee
* Electoral irregularities and constitutional violations
* Arbitrary disqualification of qualified candidates
* Breaches relating to dues, nomination, and eligibility requirements
The group maintains that they pursued every available internal mechanism, including petitions, protests, legal correspondence, and requests for dialogue, before any judicial intervention occurred.
Of particular concern is the inclusion of members who were reportedly never party to any legal action, notably Comrades Sekinat and Adejoke Adeleye.
The appellants described their suspension as “oppressive, unjust, and profoundly irresponsible,” questioning the legality and motives behind targeting individuals with no direct legal involvement.
The appeal also spotlighted the case of Comrade Oluwole Shokunbi, a former two-term Chairman and former Secretary of the Ogun NUJ Council, who was allegedly disenfranchised despite meeting constitutional and financial requirements.
His treatment, they argue, symbolises a broader erosion of democratic norms within the council and suggests the weaponisation of disciplinary structures for political vendetta.
The appellants are calling on the National Ethics and Disciplinary Committee to:
1. Immediately vacate the suspension of all eight members
2. Publicly exonerate and apologise to wrongly affected members
3. Prevent future misuse of imaginary constitutional provisions for punitive purposes
The group warned that the matter extends beyond individual suspensions and now poses a direct challenge to the NUJ’s commitment to constitutional governance, fairness, and institutional credibility.
“If constitutional provisions can be fabricated to silence dissent, then no member of the Union is safe from arbitrary persecution.”
The appeal concludes by urging the Committee to uphold justice, transparency, and constitutional fidelity over expediency, stressing that the NUJ must choose between remaining a professional body governed by law or descending into institutional arbitrariness.
