The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has dismissed a suit seeking to invalidate the Acts establishing the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission (NCPC) and the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria (NAHCON), thereby affirming the constitutionality of government-established religious pilgrimage bodies.
In a well-considered judgment, Justice Akintayo Aluko held that the Applicant, Human Rights and Empowerment Project Ltd/Gte, failed to place credible evidence before the court to show that the NCPC and NAHCON Acts violated Sections 10 and 42 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
The Applicant had approached the court on October 17, 2024, seeking several declaratory reliefs, including a pronouncement that the two Acts were inconsistent with the Constitution, as well as an order restraining the Federal Government from funding or subsidising Christian and Muslim pilgrimages.
The suit contended that government involvement in pilgrimage activities amounted to the adoption of a state religion and was discriminatory against adherents of other faiths, thereby infringing the constitutional right to freedom from discrimination.
In support of its claims, the Applicant relied largely on newspaper reports, arguing that government budgetary allocations for pilgrimages constituted a misuse of public funds and violated Section 42 of the Constitution.
At the hearing of the matter on October 9, 2025, counsel for the Applicant urged the court to hold that restricting government support to Christian and Muslim pilgrims was unconstitutional and discriminatory.
However, NAHCON, listed as the 4th Respondent, countered that Hajj-related expenses were borne by intending pilgrims, who made payments directly through state Muslim Pilgrims Welfare Boards, and not from public treasury funds.
Counsel further argued that the mere existence of the commissions did not equate to the adoption of a state religion, adding that the Applicant failed to identify any specific group of citizens whose constitutional rights had been breached.
In resolving the issues, Justice Aluko closely examined Sections 10 and 42 of the Constitution. He held that there was no credible or convincing evidence to establish that the NCPC or NAHCON Acts led to the adoption of a state religion or infringed on the right to freedom from discrimination.
On the allegation of misuse of public funds, the court noted that the Applicant’s own evidence revealed that the Lagos State Government had saved approximately N4.5 billion over three years after discontinuing the sponsorship of pilgrimages, redirecting the funds to infrastructure development.
Justice Aluko further emphasised that reliance on newspaper publications, without proper certification, amounted to hearsay and could not sustain a constitutional challenge.
He stressed that declaratory reliefs must be supported by strong, cogent, and credible evidence—an evidentiary burden the Applicant failed to discharge.
The court concluded that mere allegations, speculation, or media reports were insufficient to ground a constitutional claim. Consequently, the suit was dismissed in its entirety for lacking merit and substance.
About the Author
