National Industrial Court in Abuja on Thursday rejected a request to order Nigerian resident doctors to suspend their 19-day-old nationwide strike.
The judge, John Targema, in rejecting the ex parte application by a non-governmental organisation, Rights for All International, said he would not issue such an order behind the back of the doctors and other parties sued in the suit.
The judge said issuing “a restraining order” against the doctors to stop the strike without hearing them would be in breach of their right to fair hearing.
A similar application earlier filed on Wednesday by the federal government along with the ministry of health, was also mentioned in court on Thursday but could not be heard due to non-compliance with procedures.
MDB reported how the strike embarked upon by the doctors on August 2 is already taking its toll on many Nigerians’ access to healthcare.
The striking members of National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD), believed to constitute the largest number of physicians across Nigeria’s tertiary hospitals, are demanding among others, payment of COVID-19 inducement allowance and medical and life insurance for frontline doctors.
Rights For All International, an NGO that prides itself as a defender of human rights, had filed its ex parte application on August 16, urging the court to restrain the members of NARD from continuing their strike and order them to return to work.
Being an ex parte motion meant to be deployed in only cases considered urgent, the NGO’s application was heard in the absence of the NARD and other defendants on Thursday.
Targema heard just the applicant’s lawyer, Nnamdi Okere, who painted a picture of “an extreme health emergency” requiring the doctors to be urgently ordered back to work.
The lawyer cited “the recent outbreak of cholera and the ravaging COVID-19 pandemic which has resulted in the death of over 3000 Nigerians.”
Okere in his application wrote;
The strike action amounts to an act calculated to obstruct the smooth running of essential service and therefore callous, ill-conceived, wicked, illegal, unconstitubonal, null and void.
He accused the resident doctors, “classified as essential services workers,” of failing to explore available legal remedies before downing tools on August 2.
According to him, the strike “has now paralysed the entre health sector across Nigeria”, amounting to “a denial” of Nigerians an access to healthcare, and “detrimental” to their right under section 33 of the Nigerian constitution.
The court’s order is needed to halt the strike “to prevent further loss of lives of innocent citizens,” he said.
If the resident doctors were not ordered to resume duties, Okere said innocent Nigerians “will continue to suffer most irreparable losses.”
However, ruling after taking a short break to take a decision, the judge said he would not grant the application, but rather invite the doctors’ umbrella body, NARD, and other parties sued as defendants in the suit to come forward to state their side of the case.
Targema said granting the NGO’s application without hearing the defendants would amount to a breach of their constitutional right to fair hearing.
“The affected parties ought to be put on notice,” he said, adding that issuing a restraining order in their absence as requested by the applicant would be “in breach of section 31 of the 1999 Constitution.”
The judge therefore ordered that the application and the substantive suit along with other documents filed by the applicant be served on the respondents.
He directed that a proof of service on all the parties must be placed in the court’s file.
Targema, who heard the application as a vacation judge, said the next judge taking turns to sit, would fix a date for hearing.
The defendants sued by the applicants include relevant government ministries and ministers who would not be opposed to its suit challenging the legality of the suit.
Those sued as the main targets of the suit are National Association of Residence Doctors (NARD), its chairman, Uyilawa Okhuaihesuya, and Nigerian Medical and Dental Association (NMDA).
The rest of the defendants are the Minister of Health, the Federal Ministry of Health, the Minister of Labour and Productivity, and the Attorney General of the Federation.
