The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has dismissed a legal challenge seeking to nullify the laws establishing the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission (NCPC) and the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria (NAHCON), affirming that their existence does not violate the Nigerian Constitution.
In a judgment delivered on Friday, Justice Akintayo Aluko ruled that the claimant, Human Rights and Empowerment Project Ltd/Gte, failed to present sufficient and credible evidence to prove that the NCPC and NAHCON Acts contravened Sections 10 and 42 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The court held that the applicant’s arguments were largely speculative and unsupported by admissible evidence.
The suit, filed on October 17, 2024, sought several declarations, including a pronouncement that the two Acts were unconstitutional. The applicant also asked the court to restrain the Federal Government from funding or subsidising religious pilgrimages for Christians and Muslims, arguing that such actions amounted to discrimination against followers of other religions and signified an indirect adoption of state religion.
In support of its claims, the applicant relied mainly on newspaper reports and contended that public funds were being misapplied through government involvement in religious pilgrimages. It further alleged that the selective sponsorship of Christian and Muslim pilgrims infringed on the constitutional right to freedom from discrimination as guaranteed under Section 42 of the Constitution.
During proceedings held on October 9, 2025, counsel to the applicant urged the court to declare that government involvement in pilgrimage activities breached constitutional provisions. The lawyer argued that limiting support to only adherents of Christianity and Islam unfairly excluded practitioners of other faiths.
However, NAHCON, listed as the fourth respondent in the suit, opposed the claims, asserting that pilgrimage expenses for Muslim pilgrims were borne entirely by the pilgrims themselves. According to its counsel, payments for Hajj were made through state Muslim Pilgrims Welfare Boards and did not involve direct funding from public coffers. NAHCON further argued that the mere existence of religious commissions did not equate to the adoption of a state religion, nor did the applicant demonstrate how any specific group of citizens had suffered discrimination.
In addressing the constitutional issues raised, Justice Aluko carefully examined Sections 10 and 42 of the Constitution. He noted that while Section 10 prohibits the adoption of any religion as a state religion, Section 42 safeguards citizens from discrimination on grounds such as religion or ethnicity. The court found no evidence to show that the NCPC or NAHCON Acts breached either provision.
On the issue of alleged misuse of taxpayers’ funds, the judge observed that even the applicant’s own submissions acknowledged that Lagos State had saved approximately N4.5 billion over a three-year period after discontinuing pilgrimage sponsorship, with the funds reportedly redirected toward infrastructure development. This, the court held, weakened the applicant’s argument that public funds were being recklessly deployed.
Justice Aluko also faulted the applicant’s heavy reliance on newspaper publications, describing such materials as hearsay unless properly certified in line with evidentiary rules. He stressed that claims seeking declaratory reliefs must be supported by clear, compelling, and credible evidence, which was absent in this case.
In conclusion, the court ruled that the suit lacked merit and failed to meet the required legal threshold. As a result, the case was dismissed in its entirety, effectively affirming the constitutional validity of the NCPC and NAHCON and the government’s framework for regulating religious pilgrimages in Nigeria.
0 Comments