By Izunna Okafor, Awka
The legal battle over the leadership of the Anglican Diocese of Awka took another turn on Thursday as the Anambra State High Court in Awka adjourned proceedings in the suit instituted by suspended Archbishop Alexander Chibuzo Ibezim against the Primate of the Church of Nigeria, the Most Rev. Henry Ndukuba, and other church authorities.
The case, which lasted more than two hours, saw lawyers representing the opposing sides engage in prolonged arguments over which applications the court should hear first, with the defence urging the judge to consider preliminary objections challenging the competence of the suit and the court’s jurisdiction before proceeding to the substantive issues.
At the centre of the disagreement was a motion filed on behalf of Ibezim, seeking to overturn the Primate’s directive placing him on six months’ compulsory leave and prevent Bishop Samuel Ezeofor, appointed Supervising Bishop of the diocese, from taking over its administration.
Ibezim’s legal team was led by B. E. I. Nwofor, SAN, the recently sacked Chancellor of the Diocese, while the Primate’s defence was led by Chijioke Emeka, SAN, alongside a team of more than ten lawyers, according to the account of the proceedings.
Nwofor urged the court to prioritise his application, arguing that the Primate’s October 13 directive was issued despite the pending litigation and amounted to contempt of court. He also sought an order that would allow Ibezim to return to his office while the dispute was being determined.
However, Emeka drew the court’s attention to four notices of preliminary objection filed by the defence, arguing that the question of jurisdiction was fundamental and needed to be determined first to prevent the court from proceeding with a case it might not have the authority to hear.
The Primate’s counsel also disputed the claim that the directive was issued in disregard of the pending suit, maintaining that the letter placing Ibezim on leave was dated October 13 and was issued without knowledge of the litigation. He reportedly said the defence team became aware of the case through social media.
Emeka further told the court that Bishop Ezeofor had already assumed the role of Supervising Bishop and that the diocese’s clergy had declared their allegiance to the Primate and the Church of Nigeria, renewing their oath of canonical obedience to Ezeofor and the church leadership under Ndukuba.
The defence counsel also questioned Nwofor’s continued involvement in the Awka Diocese dispute despite threatening to join the Church of England, a remark that resulted in an outburst of laughter in the courtroom.
Another contentious issue was whether court processes filed by Ibezim had been properly served on the Primate in Abuja, with the parties disputing the adequacy of service.
Presiding over the matter, Justice Obiora Nwabunike repeatedly urged the lawyers to lower the tension, assuring them that the court was prepared to hear the pending applications. The judge, however, indicated that he would not make an order on the motions and preliminary objections that could be interpreted as prejudging the claims and counterclaims before him.
At the end of the proceedings, the court adjourned the matter until November 26, 2026, for the hearing of Nwofor’s motion and the preliminary objections challenging the court’s jurisdiction.
The adjournment means that the court has yet to determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear the suit or whether Ibezim’s application to reverse the Primate’s directive should succeed. Consequently, no substantive ruling was delivered on the central questions in dispute.
The legal confrontation also comes amid a separate disagreement between Nwofor and Ezeofor over his removal as Chancellor of the Diocese of Awka. According to the information provided, Nwofor had written to Ezeofor demanding a public apology and ₦5 billion in compensation over what he described as defamation arising from his removal.
For now, the Primate’s directive placing Ibezim on six months’ leave remains in effect, while Ezeofor continues in the role of Supervising Bishop pending further proceedings, subject to any subsequent court order.
The parties are expected to return to court on November 26, when the judge is scheduled to hear the competing applications and objections that will determine the next stage of the dispute.
