The Enugu State governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Chief Godfrey Uche Nnaji, has accused the state government of violating his privacy. Officials of the Enugu State Environmental Protection Agency allegedly stormed his campaign office, removing campaign posters and liveries. Nnaji described the action as an act of lawlessness. He questioned why the government would remove the materials while a legal challenge to the state’s signage policy is pending before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Nnaji's campaign office, located along Abakaliki Road in Enugu, was allegedly attacked by ENSEPA officials. They tore down and carted away campaign materials used to decorate the office, fence, and surrounding areas. In a statement, Nnaji said his privacy had been invaded and his personal campaign office was attacked in contravention of an ongoing court process. A Motion on Notice had been served on the relevant parties in the case, and the parties were awaiting the hearing of the matter when the enforcement action was carried out.
Nnaji described the alleged invasion of his campaign premises as "politically sad and unethical." He argued that government agencies should respect pending court proceedings and the rule of law. The development was particularly disturbing because the state’s signage policy was already being challenged before the Federal High Court, Abuja. Nnaji said it was deeply troubling that enforcement action was allegedly undertaken while the judicial process is ongoing.
The Enugu State Government recently enacted legislation prescribing a fine of N150 million for any political party that erects signage or posters without complying with the state’s regulations ahead of the 2027 general elections. The policy has attracted criticism from opposition figures, with the legality of the signage regime already being challenged in court. Critics of the law have also questioned the N150 million fine, arguing that it could conflict with the campaign spending limit for governorship candidates under the Electoral Act 2026.
Nnaji further questioned the timing of the enforcement action, asking why the government was in such a haste to destroy the campaign materials. He argued that the rule of law requires government authorities to exercise restraint where a policy or action is already before a competent court. The proper course, he said, is to allow the judiciary to determine the legality of the disputed policy rather than resorting to actions that might appear to prejudge the matter.
The Enugu State Structures for Signage and Advertisement Agency had publicly reiterated its ban on the display and pasting of posters across the state, citing the Enugu State Structures for Signage and Advertisement Agency Law No. 12 of 2016. However, Nnaji maintained that the existence of a government regulation does not remove the obligation of public authorities to respect due process, ongoing court proceedings, and the fundamental rights of citizens.
Nnaji's statement concluded that the government's actions were unacceptable and raised concerns about the level of respect for the rule of law in the state. The incident has sparked debate about the limits of government regulation and the rights of political candidates in Nigeria. The case is set to be heard in court, and it remains to be seen how the matter will be resolved.
Key points
- The Enugu State government's signage policy has been challenged in court, with critics arguing that the N150 million fine for non-compliance could conflict with the campaign spending limit for governorship candidates.
