Court dismisses suit challenging legality of religious pilgrimages laws, commissions

The Federal High Court in Lagos has dismissed a suit seeking to declare the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission (NCPC) Act and the National Hajj Commission (NAHCON) Act, unconstitutional, affirming the legality of government-established religious commissions.

According to a court document shared with PREMIUM TIMES on Monday, the judge Akintayo Aluko, on Friday, held that the applicant, Human Rights and Empowerment Project Ltd/Gte, failed to provide credible evidence that the statutes violated Sections 10 and 42 of the Nigerian constitution.

Ikenna Okoli, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), with Ikeola Atilola, appeared for the applicant, while E.O. Obotse, holding brief for Bukunola Adeagbo, represented the fifth respondent.

The applicant had approached the court on 17 October 2024, seeking declarations that the NCPC and NAHCON Acts were unconstitutional.

The suit argued that government sponsorship of Christian and Muslim pilgrimages discriminated against adherents of other faiths.

It also requested orders restraining the Federal Government from funding or allocating public funds to religious pilgrimages or commissions.

In a 22-paragraph affidavit deposed by Kelvin Emonvuon, the applicant primarily relied on newspaper publications, arguing that government allocations for pilgrimages constituted discrimination and an unconstitutional adoption of a state religion.

The suit referenced Sections 10, 38, and 42 of the Constitution and cited legal precedents including Aminu v. A.G Kano State (2022) and Akintola v. Adegbenro (1963).

NAHCON’s response

The fourth respondent, NAHCON, countered that all Hajj payments were made directly by intending pilgrims through state-level Muslim Pilgrims Welfare Boards, not from public funds.

The commission argued that its existence did not amount to the adoption of a state religion and noted that the applicant failed to identify any citizen or group whose rights had been violated.

NAHCON’s lawyer emphasised that declaratory prayers required strong and convincing evidence, which the applicant did not provide.

Judgement

The court formulated the fundamental questions for determination in the case, which is, whether the NCPC and NAHCON Acts were inconsistent with Sections 10 and 42 of the Nigerian constitution and whether the allocation of taxpayers’ money for the commissions was unconstitutional or beyond the powers of the federal government.
Mr Aluko ruled that the Acts are not inconsistent with the constitution.

The court found no evidence that the government had adopted any religion as a state religion or discriminated against any citizen based on religion.

The judge also noted that the applicant’s affidavit indicated that the Lagos State Government had saved N4.5 billion by redirecting funds from pilgrimage sponsorship to infrastructure.

The court further held that newspaper reports relied upon by the applicant constituted hearsay unless certified under the law.

Mr Aluko added that the applicant failed to provide credible and compelling evidence to support its claims.

READ ALSO: Hajj 2026: NAHCON opens medical team application portal, introduces new rules

The suit was dismissed as lacking merit, with no order as to costs, and the parties were directed to bear their respective expenses.

The NCPC Act empowers the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission to regulate and coordinate Christian pilgrimages, including licensing and welfare of pilgrims.

The NAHCON Act establishes the National Hajj Commission to oversee and coordinate Hajj and Umrah activities for Nigerian pilgrims.

The applicant argued that government sponsorship of pilgrimages discriminates against adherents of other faiths, while NAHCON maintained that all payments are made directly by pilgrims through state Muslim Pilgrims Welfare Boards.

Media reports and public discussions have mentioned the commissions’ roles, government funding, and efforts to reduce Hajj costs while promoting interfaith harmony.