The Federal High Court, Abuja Division, has fixed December 8 to hear a suit filed by the founder of PRNigeria, Yushau Shuaib, against the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS).

He is challenging his unlawful withdrawal from the Senior Executive Course (SEC) 47 of the Institute.

The case, which was assigned to Justice Binta Nyako, according to the hearing notice made available to journalists on Sunday, had been fixed for hearing.

Mr Shuaib had dragged NIPSS before the court to challenge his alleged unlawful and arbitrary withdrawal from SEC) 47 of the institute.

He said this was after his admission had been approved by President Bola Tinubu and necessary payment and conditions precedents had been fully met.

Mr Shuaib, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1329/2025, is demanding ₦1 billion in general, special, and aggravated damages against NIPSS over emotional trauma and reputational damage he suffered as a result of the action of NIPSS against him.

The plaintiff, a renowned public relations expert, is also seeking an additional ₦100 million as litigation costs, having issued a pre-action notice on June 16, 2025, to the institute’s Director General, Professor Ayo Omotayo, which was allegedly ignored by the management.

The case, filed on his behalf by Yunus Abdulsalam, SAN, seeks a court order setting aside his withdrawal from SEC 47 and reinstating him with full rights, benefits, and privileges.

Mr Shuaib is also asking for a perpetual injunction restraining NIPSS, its agents, or officials from further harassment, intimidation or cyberbullying.

In his originating summons, the plaintiff raised eight issues for determination.

He argued that the publication of a news article by PRNigeria, an independent media organisation, cannot lawfully be attributed to him as misconduct when he neither authored nor endorsed it.

He also questioned whether NIPSS’s alleged access and use of his private email without consent violated his constitutional right to privacy under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.

Mr Shuaib further contended that disciplinary action against him for professional opinions expressed in a published article breached his right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Section 39(1).

He argued that barring other participants from interacting with him and removing him from official platforms amounted to harassment, cyberbullying and forced isolation.

He maintained that denying him participation in the international study tour, despite his full payment of ₦18.3 million course fees, constituted discrimination and breach of contract.

Mr Shuaib also faulted his suspension and withdrawal from the course based on alleged “externalisation of the subject” without a fair hearing, describing it as a violation of his constitutional right under Section 36(1).

He is therefore seeking declarations that the actions of NIPSS were unlawful, unjustifiable, discriminatory and unsupported by any regulation guiding the institute.

In a 40-paragraph affidavit, Mr Shuaib stated that he was nominated by the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations (NIPR) to represent it at the course, a nomination approved by the President of Nigeria.

He attached his admission letter, proof of payment of ₦18.3 million and evidence of compliance with NIPSS requirements, including handing over of responsibilities at his company, Image Merchants Promotion Limited, publishers of PRNigeria.

He alleged that despite complying with institutional rules, he was subjected to harassment, intimidation and arbitrary disciplinary actions.

According to him, on March 24, he received a query over a PRNigeria article titled “NIPSS Goes Digital; Launches Paperless Platform after Submitting Landmark Report to President Tinubu.”

Mr Shuaib insisted he neither authored nor edited the article, which other media outlets had widely reported.

He further alleged that on April 25, NIPSS again queried him about an internal email concerning an editorial, “Understanding the ‘Blue’ in the Blue Economy.”

He stated the article was a professional reflection containing no sensitive information, yet NIPSS intercepted it before it could be published.

Mr Shuaib claimed that the queries were unfounded and not supported by the NIPSS Code of Conduct.

He further alleged that his withdrawal letter dated June 2, was curiously addressed only to NIPR without being officially served on him.

The plaintiff, therefore, is asking the court to reinstate him into SEC 47 with full privileges, among other reliefs.

(NAN)