It has been contended before the Federal High Court in the Suit No. FHC/ASB/CS60/2023 pending before the Asaba Judicial Division that the World Bank (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA) are recognized under the International Financial Organizations Act as an international organization and conferred with immunity from legal process. The Reliefs sought in the Suit includes an Order directing the 1st to 6th Respondents to rescind the said Financing Agreement (worth $800 million dollars) signed on or about the 16th of August, 2022 (for financing of palliatives to be disbursed through cash transfers to about 50 million Nigerians by the 2nd Respondent); on grounds of being in breach or likely breach of Article V, Section 1(b)&(g) of the Articles of Agreement of the International Development Association and Articles 22 & 24 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act as well as Section 34(1)(b) of the 1999 Constitution.
However, Chief Patrick Osagie Eholor, who is one of the parties that instituted the Suit for himself and on behalf of the Peoples and each Citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, stated that his lawyers have his instruction to contend instead that the Court that the World Bank (IBRD) and the IDA do not possess a status entitled to immunity. As their findings revealed that the Host Country Establishment Agreement between the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the World Bank Group of Institutions is not a Federal Gazette as statutorily required by Section 6 of the International Financial Organizations Act and Section 11(2) of the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act 1962. And that the only way by which the IBRD and the IDA as an international organization may be entitled to immunity in Nigeria is by fulfilling the conditions set out in Section 11(1) and (2) and 18 of the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act, and nothing less. The Act does not expressly contemplate or make provisions in respect to the effect of non-gazetted immunity status or order of the Minister.
Consequently, Chief Eholor, stated that the Applicants in the Suit were ready and poised to show that the proof of immunity by an Order made in the Federal Gazette has not been established by the IBRD and the IDA as permitted by law or applicable statutory rules. Because, the law is that the proof of immunity should be by an Order made in the Federal Gazette; and that for any international organization to use the defence of immunity, the following must be proved: (a) that the organisation was declared by the Minister to be an organisation member of which are entitled to immunity or the government thereof; and (b) that the Minister has by an order in the Federal Gazette, specified that the organisation shall have the immunities and privileges set out in the First Schedule, including that from suit or legal process.