A Federal High Court in Lagos has struck out a lawsuit challenging the legality of the statutes establishing the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission (NCPC), and the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria (NAHCON), ruling that the claimant did not demonstrate any violation of constitutional provisions in the establishment or functioning of the two bodies.
Delivering judgment, Justice Akintayo Aluko ruled that the applicant did not adduce credible or convincing evidence to show that the establishment and functioning of the two commissions violated any provision of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
Background of the Suit
The suit was instituted by Human Rights and Empowerment Project Ltd/Gte, which asked the court to declare the NCPC Act and the NAHCON Act unconstitutional. The organisation argued that the laws establishing the commissions contravened sections 10 and 42 of the constitution, which prohibit the adoption of a state religion and guarantee freedom from discrimination.
In addition, the applicant sought an order restraining the federal government from funding or subsidising Christian and Muslim pilgrimages, contending that such involvement amounted to the adoption of a state religion and discriminated against adherents of other faiths.
Arguments Before the Court
Relying largely on newspaper reports attached to affidavits, the applicant alleged that public funds were being used to support religious activities and maintained that such expenditures constituted a misuse of taxpayers’ money.
At the hearing of the suit on October 9, 2025, counsel to the applicant urged the court to declare government involvement in pilgrimages unconstitutional, arguing that restricting official support to Christians and Muslims violated citizens’ right to freedom from discrimination.
In response, NAHCON told the court that intending pilgrims finance their participation through payments made to state Muslim pilgrims’ welfare boards, stressing that the federal government does not directly sponsor the Hajj.
Counsel for NAHCON further argued that the existence of the two commissions did not amount to the adoption of a state religion and submitted that the applicant failed to identify any individual or group whose constitutional rights had been infringed by their operations.
Court’s Findings
In its judgment delivered on Friday, the court examined sections 10 and 42 of the constitution and held that the applicant failed to present credible evidence demonstrating that the establishment of NAHCON and NCPC resulted in the adoption of a state religion or violated the right to freedom from discrimination.
On the allegation of misuse of public funds, Justice Aluko noted that the applicant’s own evidence showed that the Lagos State Government saved about ₦4.5 billion over three years after discontinuing pilgrimage sponsorship and redirected the funds to infrastructure projects—an indication, the judge said, that governments retain discretion over such policy choices.
The judge further held that the newspaper reports relied upon by the applicant amounted to hearsay evidence, stressing that such materials could not be admitted as proof unless properly certified in accordance with the law.
Justice Aluko emphasised that declaratory reliefs must be supported by strong, cogent, and convincing evidence, which the applicant failed to provide.
“The law is settled that allegations founded on speculation or media reports cannot sustain a constitutional claim,” the judge held.
Conclusion
The court consequently dismissed the suit for lacking merit and made no order as to costs, directing the parties to bear their respective expenses.
The ruling effectively affirms the continued legal existence and operation of NAHCON and the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission, reinforcing the position that constitutional challenges to federal institutions must be backed by solid evidence rather than conjecture or media reports.