The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday dismissed a N1bn suit filed by the founder of PRNigeria and Chief Executive Officer of Image Merchants Promotion Limited, Yushau Shuaib, against the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies over his withdrawal from the institute’s Senior Executive Course 47.
Delivering judgment, Justice Binta Nyako held that NIPSS acted within its disciplinary powers in withdrawing Shuaib from the programme after finding that he breached the institute’s confidentiality rules.
The judge held that Shuaib, by issuing an apology on behalf of PRNigeria over a publication considered offensive by the institute, had effectively admitted wrongdoing.
Justice Nyako further ruled that the publisher was afforded a fair hearing, having appeared before the institute’s disciplinary committee to respond to the allegations before disciplinary action was taken.
The court also held that Shuaib was bound by the oath of secrecy and confidentiality he subscribed to upon admission into the Senior Executive Course and was therefore obligated to comply with the institute’s rules throughout the programme.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, Shuaib said he would challenge the decision at the Court of Appeal, insisting that the court failed to distinguish between his personal conduct and the editorial independence of PRNigeria.
In a statement issued shortly after the judgment, he argued that he had relinquished the day-to-day management of PRNigeria before resuming at NIPSS in compliance with the institute’s admission requirements.
According to him, he could not lawfully be held personally liable for publications produced by an independent media organisation which he neither authored nor edited while participating in the course.
He also faulted the judgment for declining to pronounce on his allegation that NIPSS unlawfully accessed his private email communications, insisting that the action violated his constitutional right to privacy.
“While I respect the judgment of the Federal High Court, I firmly believe there are substantial constitutional and legal issues that deserve appellate review. In the interest of justice, fairness and the protection of fundamental rights, we shall be approaching the Court of Appeal without delay,” he said.
Shuaib had approached the court in July 2025 after NIPSS withdrew him from the Senior Executive Course, seeking declarations that the action was unlawful, unconstitutional and a breach of his fundamental rights.
In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1329/2025, filed through Senior Advocate of Nigeria Yunus Abdulsalam, he sought N1bn in general, special and aggravated damages for alleged emotional trauma and reputational injury, as well as N100m as litigation costs.
He also prayed the court to set aside his withdrawal from the programme, order his reinstatement with full rights and privileges and restrain the institute from further acts of harassment, intimidation and cyberbullying.
Shuaib further contended that NIPSS violated his right to privacy by allegedly accessing and relying on his private email correspondence without his consent and infringed his right to freedom of expression by disciplining him over publications by PRNigeria.
In a supporting affidavit, he stated that he was nominated by the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations for the Senior Executive Course, with the nomination subsequently approved by President Bola Tinubu.
He maintained that before resuming at the institute, he formally handed over the management of PRNigeria in line with NIPSS requirements.
According to him, his troubles began after he was queried over a PRNigeria report titled, “NIPSS Goes Digital; Launches Paperless Platform after Submitting Landmark Report to President Tinubu,” which he insisted he neither wrote nor edited.
He also alleged that he was subsequently queried via an internal editorial email regarding an opinion article, before the institute eventually withdrew him from the programme in June 2025.
Despite the setback, Shuaib expressed confidence that the appellate court would give due consideration to the constitutional, contractual and privacy issues raised in the case.
