By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Friday ordered the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) to restore the registration of the National Youth Council of Nigeria (NYCN).
In a judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako, the court also disbanded the Interim Management Committee (IMC) that the CAC and the Ministry of Youth Development had constituted to oversee the council’s affairs.
The court declared the IMC unlawful, holding that the CAC, as a regulatory agency, lacked the statutory power to determine the tenure of an organisation’s leaders or to constitute an interim management body for any registered association.
It will be recalled that on October 6, 2025, the Commission withdrew the certificate of registration it had issued to the NYCN on October 28, 2020.
The CAC, in collaboration with the Ministry of Youth Development, established a nine-member Interim Management Committee (IMC) chaired by Buhari Shehu on October 7, 2025, to manage the council’s affairs.
Dissatisfied with that development, two plaintiffs — including Ambassador Sukubo Sara-Igbe Sukubo, who identified himself as the NYCN’s President and Secretary of its Board of Trustees (BoT) — approached the court to challenge the CAC’s actions.
In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2142/2025, the plaintiffs asked the court, among other things, to determine whether the provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020 that empower the CAC to suspend trustees, appoint interim managers, and establish administrative committees are consistent with Sections 39, 40, and 251 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which guarantee freedom of association and vest jurisdiction over such disputes in the courts.
The litigants also asked the court to consider whether earlier judicial decisions striking down Sections 839 and 851 of CAMA prevented the CAC from relying on those provisions, and whether actions taken under the invalidated provisions are unlawful and unconstitutional.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs questioned the legality of any decisions affecting NYCN’s trusteeship while an appeal on the matter is still pending before the court.
They challenged the validity of a communiqué issued on October 7, 2025, which announced the withdrawal of NYCN’s certificate of registration and the establishment of an interim management committee, insisting that the communiqué is null, void, and unconstitutional.
Delivering judgment in the matter, Justice Nyako held that the CAC acted beyond its statutory powers when it deregistered the NYCN and subsequently set up an interim caretaker arrangement for the council.
The court nullified the deregistration of the council and ordered the restoration of the status quo ante bellum.
Likewise, the court directed the CAC to immediately restore NYCN’s certificate and dissolve the IMC as illegal.
“The powers conferred on the CAC under the Companies and Allied Matters Act are regulatory in nature.
“The CAC undoubtedly possesses regulatory powers over incorporated trustees. These powers, however, cannot be exercised in a manner that effectively determines a live dispute already awaiting judicial determination.
“The Commission may investigate. It may supervise compliance with statutory requirements. It may make inquiries into the affairs of an association. What it cannot do is assume the role of the court by effectively deciding who should govern the association while the issue remains the subject of pending litigation.
“The evidence before this court shows that the defendants went beyond investigation. They purportedly withdrew the certificate of the 1st claimant and proceeded to constitute an Interim Management Committee to assume control of the organisation.
“However, whatever nomenclature is used, the practical consequence of that decision was to displace the existing leadership structure and install another authority in its place.
“In my view, such actions altered the status quo in a dispute that was already before the courts and had the tendency of rendering pending proceedings nugatory,” Justice Nyako held.
Continuing, the judge held: “The law does not permit a party, directly or indirectly, to achieve administratively what remains unresolved judicially. This would amount to an abuse of court process. However, while I decline to make general pronouncements declaring Sections 839 and 851 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act unconstitutional, the actions taken pursuant to those provisions, on the particular facts of this case, were unlawful and cannot stand.
“The court is satisfied that the intervention complained of exceeded what was reasonably necessary to achieve regulatory oversight and encroached into matters properly reserved for judicial determination.
“Parties are thus advised to await the outcome of the appeal. I consequently hold that while the 1st and 2nd defendants possess statutory oversight powers over incorporated trustees, the withdrawal of recognition and imposition of an Interim Management Committee in the circumstances of this case were premature and cannot be sustained.
“Parties are hereby directed to maintain the position existing before the intervention complained of, pending the determination of the dispute currently before the Court of Appeal,” Justice Nyako added.
