DSS seeks to block PAT UTOMI from staging shadow government rallies

Thursday, June 5, 2025 -The Department of State Services (DSS) has filed a legal request at the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to restrain Professor Pat Utomi from making further public statements or organizing gatherings in support of his newly formed shadow government.

Professor Utomi, a political economist, on May 5 unveiled what he described as the Big Tent Coalition Shadow Government, a virtual initiative intended to serve as a “credible opposition” to President Bola Tinubu’s administration. The DSS, however, views the move as unconstitutional and a potential threat to national security.

In a suit numbered FHC/ABJ/CS/937/2025, the DSS asked the court to declare the formation of the shadow government unlawful. Through its counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde, the secret police submitted an application backed by intelligence reports, alleging that Utomi, currently outside the country and expected to return on June 6, intends to stage public rallies and road shows upon his return.

According to the DSS, these proposed events, presented under the guise of freedom of speech and association, are designed to incite public unrest and mirror the kind of widespread disruption seen during the 2020 End SARS protests. The agency expressed concern that such actions could trigger riots, violent demonstrations, and lead to loss of lives and property.

In an affidavit submitted to support the application, the DSS maintained that Utomi’s campaign and associated activities pose a “serious threat to public order, safety, and national unity.” The agency also referenced remarks made by Utomi during a recent public lecture on May 26 at the University of Lagos, which it claims could influence the court proceedings and further escalate tensions.

As a result, the DSS is seeking an interlocutory injunction from the court to bar Utomi and any individuals acting on his behalf from organizing or participating in any rallies, lectures, publications, or broadcasts that could be seen as promoting the shadow government or its objectives. The suit argues that granting the injunction would serve the interests of justice, uphold national security, and reinforce the rule of law.

The court is yet to rule on the application.