A Federal High Court ruling in Lagos has dealt a decisive blow to the House of Representatives’ attempt to hold Seplat Energy accountable for oil spill damages, declaring that lawmakers had no constitutional authority to order the company to pay N72.624 billion in compensation to affected communities.
Delivering judgment in Suit No. FHC/LAG/CS/862/2026 on Monday, Justice Allagoa sided entirely with Seplat Energy Producing Nigeria Unlimited, ruling that the House had effectively stepped into territory reserved exclusively for the courts when it moved from investigating alleged spill incidents to determining civil liability and awarding damages.
The case traced back to a November 14, 2025 report from the House, which found Seplat liable for oil spill-related harm and directed the company to compensate affected communities in installments, based on valuation reports the lawmakers had compiled. The House went further still, summoning Seplat’s Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer to appear before multiple committees, a directive communicated formally through a letter from the Clerk to the National Assembly.
Seplat pushed back through its counsel, Augustine Okafor, arguing that no matter how thorough the House’s investigative process may have been, the Constitution simply does not permit lawmakers to adjudicate civil disputes or impose financial liability on individuals or corporations. That authority, the company maintained, belongs solely to courts of competent jurisdiction under the 1999 Constitution as amended.
The House of Representatives did not send legal representation to contest the case, and the court ultimately found entirely in Seplat’s favor. Justice Allagoa acknowledged that the House does hold legitimate investigative powers under the Constitution, but drew a firm line between that authority and the act of adjudicating liability, ruling that the two are fundamentally distinct and that lawmakers had crossed from one into the other.
In granting every relief Seplat sought, the court interpreted Sections 4(1), 6(6)(b), 88(2) and 251(1)(n) of the Constitution, affirming that the power to determine civil liability and award compensation rests with the judiciary alone. The House’s November directive was accordingly declared unconstitutional, null, and void in its entirety.
The ruling effectively nullifies the compensation order and reinforces a broader constitutional boundary around the National Assembly’s investigative powers, making clear that even well-documented findings from a legislative probe cannot substitute for a judicial determination when it comes to imposing financial penalties on a company.
