NNAJI ACCUSES ENUGU GOVERNMENT OF ‘INVADING’ CAMPAIGN OFFICE
Read Time:3 Minute, 17 Second
By: Fasasi Hammad
I’ve kept the allegations clearly attributed to Nnaji and retained the government’s stated signage-regulation context. The ₦150 million permit requirement has also been independently reported.
The Enugu State governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Chief Godfrey Uche Nnaji, has accused the state government of violating his privacy after officials of the Enugu State Environmental Protection Agency, ENSEPA, allegedly stormed his campaign office and removed campaign posters and other materials.
Nnaji alleged that the agency’s officials tore down and carted away campaign posters, liveries and other materials used to decorate his office, fence and surrounding areas along Abakaliki Road, Enugu.
He described the alleged action as an act of lawlessness, questioning 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.
In a statement, Nnaji said, “My privacy has been invaded by the Enugu State government. My personal campaign office was attacked by the Enugu State Environmental Protection Agency (ENSEPA) and all my posters torn down in contravention of an ongoing court process.”
He said a Motion on Notice had already been served on the relevant parties in the case, adding that the parties were awaiting the hearing when the alleged enforcement action took place.
Nnaji described the alleged invasion of his campaign premises as “politically sad and unethical,” arguing that government agencies should respect pending court proceedings and the rule of law.
He said the development was particularly disturbing because the state’s signage policy was already being challenged before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
“What makes this development particularly disturbing is that the Enugu State Government’s signage policy is currently being challenged before the Federal High Court, Abuja, and a Motion on Notice has already been served on the relevant parties. We are awaiting the hearing and determination of the matter.
“Against this background, I find it deeply troubling that enforcement action was allegedly undertaken while the judicial process is ongoing,” Nnaji said.
The Enugu State Government had earlier introduced a mandatory N150 million advertising permit for political parties and candidates participating in the 2026 and 2027 elections. The state’s signage agency said the permit was required before political parties and candidates could deploy outdoor campaign materials.
The policy has attracted criticism from opposition figures, while its legality has also been challenged in court.
Critics of the regulation have questioned the N150 million fee, arguing that it could conflict with the campaign spending limit for governorship candidates under the Electoral Act 2026.
“If the Electoral Act limits total spend of a governorship candidate to N1 billion, then any state government that imposes such a fee for permit to post posters and erect signage, is either being unrealistic or is demonstrating that it does not want the opposition to campaign,” the statement said.
Nnaji also questioned the timing of the alleged enforcement action, asking, “Why the haste? Why destroy first when the court is already seized of the matter?”
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 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,” he said.
Nnaji acknowledged that the Enugu State Structures for Signage and Advertisement Agency, ENSSAA, 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. The agency has said the restriction applies to unauthorised poster displays and is intended to regulate outdoor advertising and prevent environmental defacement.
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.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0