The ECOWAS Court of Justice has awarded $50,000 in general damages in favour of a former Commissioner for Internal Services of the ECOWAS Commission, Prof. Nazifi Abdullahi Darma, after ruling that his removal and replacement before the expiration of his tenure were unlawful.
The court in its judgment also ordered the payment of his outstanding salaries, allowances and accrued financial entitlements from the date his tenure was unlawfully terminated until its expiration, less any sums already received.
Darma disclosed this on Friday while addressing the press on the judgment delivered on October 7, 2026, in his case against the President of the ECOWAS Commission and the Council of Ministers.
He described the ruling as a victory for institutional accountability and due process, saying, “This judgment is not a personal victory. It is a victory for the rule of law, institutional integrity, accountability, and due process within ECOWAS.”
The court also ordered that the costs of the proceedings be assessed and paid by the ECOWAS Commission.
However, it did not order Darma’s reinstatement because his four-year tenure, which began on July 16, 2022, expired on August 31, 2026.
Darma said, “The Court ordered that: All outstanding salaries, allowances, and accrued financial entitlements due to me from the date of the unlawful cessation of my tenure until its expiration be paid, less any sums already received.
“General damages of USD 50,000 be paid for the non-pecuniary harm resulting from the procedural unlawfulness and premature termination of my tenure.
“The costs of the proceedings be assessed and paid by the ECOWAS Commission. Because my tenure expired on 31 August 2026, the Court did not order my reinstatement”.
The former commissioner added that the judgment followed 11 months of legal proceedings over the withdrawal of his responsibilities, his recall by Nigeria and his replacement as a statutory appointee of the regional organisation.
Darma was nominated by Nigeria and appointed Commissioner for Internal Services in 2022. His portfolio covered Administration and General Services, Procurement, Budget and Treasury, Financial Reporting and Grants, Human Resources, Conference and Protocol Services, and Internal Telecommunications.
He explained that following institutional reforms within ECOWAS, responsibilities previously handled by four commissioners were consolidated under his office.
Consequently, he said he effectively served as the Community’s chief financial, procurement, human resources and grants management officer, while also acting as custodian of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.
According to Darma, the dispute arose after he raised concerns about the participation of non-management personnel in management meetings, the absence of objective and consistent scoring procedures for recruiting senior officials, and the assignment of the responsibilities of the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Digitalisation to a non-statutory official following the departure of the commissioner from Niger.
He said the concerns were formally communicated to the then President of the Commission and, in some instances, the Chair of the Council of Ministers, but were neither adequately addressed nor resolved.
The former commissioner said the situation escalated when the former President of the Commission issued a memorandum on October 30, 2025, purporting to withdraw his delegated authority, making adverse allegations about his conduct and performance, and initiating a process to replace him.
He subsequently instituted proceedings before the ECOWAS Court of Justice on November 3, 2025. While the case was pending, Nigeria recalled him on December 12, 2025, and nominated a successor. The Council of Ministers subsequently formalised the replacement.
Explaining the court’s findings, Darma said the judges rejected the argument that the October 30 memorandum was merely an administrative measure.
He said the court found that the memorandum contained adverse allegations that significantly affected his responsibilities and formed part of a process aimed at his replacement, without prior notice or an effective opportunity for him to respond.
The court also clarified that the managerial authority of the President of the Commission did not extend to transferring or extinguishing powers and responsibilities assigned by Community law to another statutory office.
On Nigeria’s recall of Darma, the court held that nomination and appointment were distinct legal acts. According to the former commissioner, the court ruled that a commissioner, once appointed, derived his mandate from Community law rather than from the member state that nominated him.
It therefore declared that Nigeria’s recall did not, by itself, terminate his appointment or create a vacancy in his office.
Applying the relevant provisions of the ECOWAS Treaty and supplementary protocols, the court also ruled that his removal and replacement were unlawful because the legal conditions required for terminating a commissioner’s mandate had not been met.
Darma said the judgment affirmed the principle that statutory appointees of the Community could only be removed through lawful procedures and on legally recognised grounds.
He added that the ruling reinforced the independence of ECOWAS institutions and protected them against arbitrary actions capable of undermining their credibility and effectiveness.
Reflecting on his role in the regional organisation, the former commissioner said his actions throughout the dispute were motivated by a commitment to institutional integrity and proper governance rather than personal interest.
“I was not among those who founded the institution, but I became one of its senior officials and considered it my duty to protect the systems, procedures, and values that sustain it.
“If faced with similar circumstances in the future, I would take the same stand again. Institutions survive only when rules, procedures, and established processes are respected,”he said.
Darma called on all ECOWAS institutions to comply fully with the judgment and review relevant protocols and regulations where necessary to eliminate ambiguities and prevent similar disputes.