Court orders ASSU to stop strike, union president reacts

Following the National Industrial Court of Nigeria's (NICN) judgement prohibiting it from continuing its strike, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) said it is awaiting legal counsel for expert advice.

This information was provided by the Union's president, Emmanuel Osodeke, in a telephone interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Wednesday in Abuja.

The union started the strike in February to demand an improved learning environment and member welfare.

The funding of the Revitalization of Public Universities, Earned Academic Allowances, University Transparency Accountability Solution (UTAS), and promotion arrears are some of the demands made by lecturers.

Others include the 2009 ASUU-FG Agreement's renegotiation and the Integrated Personnel Payroll Information System's inconsistency.

Before the federal government filed a lawsuit with the court to end the strike so that classes could restart, it had been in effect for seven months.

This came after the union and the administration were unable to come to an amicable agreement.

However, students have started a protest by blocking the entrance to the international airport in Lagos through the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS), and they have threatened to block other major roads if their demands are not met by the government.

At the request of the Minister of Labour and Employment and in accordance with his authority as set down in Section 17 of the Trade Dispute Act, 2004, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, the NICN approved the injunction until the resolution of the substantive complaint before the court.

In a decision on an application made by the federal government, the applicant/claimant, Justice Polycarp Hamman ruled that ASUU (the defendants) should refrain from participating in any more strikes until the outcome of the substantive litigation is made.

Mr. Hamman asserts that the defendants' attorney Femi Falana's claim that the applicants' act had been ended is irrelevant and contradicted by Exhibit 2 from August 29, 2022.

Mr. Hamman pointed out that the defendants' strike action, which began on February 14, was still ongoing as of the time he read his decision on Wednesday.

He insisted that after the appropriate TDA sections have been followed by the Minister of Labor in mediating a labour dispute, workers are not permitted to strike.

He commended the minister for acting in the country's best interests by referring the case to the Nigerian National Industrial Court.

As the matter has been referred to the Industrial Court by the Minister of Labour and Employment, the defendants are required by law not to engage in any further strikes, pending the resolution of the substantive matter, Justice Hamman dismissed the defendants' counsel's assertion that the strike was caused by a repeated breach of the agreement.

In addition, Justice Hamman stated that, in accordance with the court's procedures, Mr. Falana's revised request that the court gives a speedy hearing of the application rather than injunctive relief "is of no moment."

Contrary to Falana's claim, he insisted that the applicants satisfied the requirements for issuing an injunction.

James Igwe, the federal government's primary attorney, responded in the courtroom, saying: "I appreciate his Lordship for the judgement, rendered with unmatched erudition, intellectual analysis, and research, and which took into cognizance of education as being basic to education in Nigeria."

Source