The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday declined a request from the Nigerian Insurers Association (NIA) and 17 insurance companies to temporarily stop the House of Representatives and its Committee on Capital Market and Institutions from investigating and seeking recovery of an alleged N98.4 billion owed to the Federal Government by non-government-funded insurers.
Justice Emeka Nwite dismissed the ex parte application, which was presented by the plaintiffs’ lawyer, A.M. Kayode, during the court session.
Earlier, the NIA had issued a statement criticizing the House Committee’s investigation, claiming it amounted to “legislative overreach.” In the motion ex parte, seen by Nairametrics, the NIA argued that as the umbrella body for the 2nd to 18th plaintiffs—insurance companies—it has a duty to protect their interests. The motion was led by senior advocate Professor Taiwo Osipitan.
The respondents in the suit include the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Capital Market and Institutions, Hon. Kwamoti B. Laori, and Hon. Bob Solomon.
According to Osipitan, the companies involved are private, non-government-funded insurers regulated by executive agencies such as the National Insurance Commission (NAICOM), the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), and the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS). He argued that the House Committee lacked the authority to summon the Chief Executive Officers or Managing Directors of these companies or compel them to submit operational and regulatory documents.
Osipitan emphasized that the Committee’s actions infringed upon the constitutional separation of powers and regulatory independence, necessitating urgent court intervention to prevent continued breaches.
In a supporting affidavit, Akioya Toyin Victoria, a manager with the NIA, stated that the Committee’s letters summoning the 2nd to 18th plaintiffs were intended to enforce recovery of N98.4 billion in alleged liabilities. She further claimed that the House Committee had hired a consortium of consultants to audit publicly listed insurance firms and assess their compliance with relevant laws and regulations—despite lacking statutory authority to do so.
Victoria warned that the plaintiffs’ businesses faced potential harm if the court failed to grant the temporary injunction.
What Happened in Court
At Wednesday’s session, A.M. Kayode urged Justice Nwite to grant the motion ex parte, arguing that the court needed to determine whether the House of Representatives had the legal right to summon or investigate the insurers.
Kayode noted that the Committee had invited company representatives to appear on July 21, 2025, and they complied. He said the lawsuit was filed on July 18, and the defendants were served with advance copies. Despite this, the Committee continued its proceedings on July 24 and scheduled another session for August 4.
He expressed concern that the Committee’s actions might undermine the case’s subject matter before it could be properly adjudicated.
Justice Nwite initially granted Kayode’s application for the matter to be heard during the court’s annual vacation but ultimately ruled that the interests of justice would be better served by notifying the respondents. He therefore refused the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order and adjourned the case to August 13 for hearing on the substantive motion.
Background
The NIA, which represents licensed insurance and reinsurance companies in Nigeria, had earlier responded to the Committee’s ongoing investigation of certain insurers over alleged financial misconduct.
The investigation began following reports that 25 insurance companies were under scrutiny for failing to remit large sums—allegedly in the billions of naira—to the federal government.
In its suit, the NIA stated that it approached the court to clarify the legality and constitutional scope of the House Committee’s actions. It seeks to safeguard regulatory autonomy and ensure that legislative oversight does not overstep its legal boundaries.
