The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), and the Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, have requested the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the Expatriate Employment Levy (EEL), a proposed taxation policy targeting foreign workers in Nigeria.
The ministers made their requests in separate preliminary objections filed before Justice Inyang Ekwo, arguing that the plaintiff lacks the legal standing to challenge the policy and that the suit is without merit.
Background of the Case
The lawsuit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1780/2024, was filed by the Incorporated Trustees of New Kosol Welfare Initiative through its legal counsel, Paul Atayi. The group is seeking an interim injunction to halt the implementation of the Expatriate Employment Levy pending a full hearing.
The EEL, introduced by the Federal Government on February 27, 2024, imposes the following annual fees on companies employing foreign workers:
- $15,000 (₦23 million) for expatriates at the director level.
- $10,000 (₦16 million) for non-director expatriates.
Failure to comply could attract severe penalties, including:
- ₦1 million fine and/or five years imprisonment for incomplete reporting.
- ₦3 million fine for failure to file the levy or register an expatriate.
- ₦3 million fine for failing to renew the levy before expiration.
The plaintiff argues that the policy is harmful to Nigeria’s economy, likening it to a chokehold on growth.
Ministers’ Legal Arguments
In her objection filed on March 14, Mrs. Eva Omotese, Director of Legal Services for the Ministry of Interior, asked the court to strike out the Minister’s name from the suit.
Omotese argued that:
- The plaintiff lacks locus standi (legal standing) to bring the case, depriving the court of jurisdiction.
- The case is academic and hypothetical, as there is no evidence the government is preparing to enforce the policy.
- The EEL was approved by the Federal Executive Council in 2023, but President Bola Tinubu has suspended its implementation after consulting with stakeholders.
She contended that the plaintiff’s failure to seek clarification from the Ministry before filing the lawsuit made the case premature and an abuse of court process.
The Attorney-General’s office, represented by Maimuna Shiru, Director of Civil Litigation and Public Law, echoed these arguments, urging the court to dismiss the suit due to lack of jurisdiction.
Plaintiff’s Response
In response, the plaintiff insists that the case falls under public interest litigation, giving it the legal right to challenge the policy. The plaintiff urged the court to dismiss the ministers’ objections and allow the matter to proceed to a full hearing.
Court’s Position
During the hearing on Monday, Justice Ekwo confirmed that both defendants had filed preliminary objections and directed the plaintiff’s counsel to obtain the Minister of Interior’s objection from the court registry.
The judge adjourned the case to May 7 for the hearing of the preliminary objections.