The Chairman of the Forum of Former Members of the Enugu State House of Assembly and former South-East Spokesman to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Denge Josef Onoh, has described the recent £420 million judgment delivered by an Enugu State High Court over the 1949 Iva Valley massacre as “powerful in spirit but powerless in law.”
Onoh stated this in a reaction made available to journalists following the ruling in Suit No. E/909/2024, which relates to the killing of 21 Nigerian coal miners by British colonial authorities at the Iva Valley coal mine in Enugu in 1949.
The Enugu State High Court reportedly ordered the United Kingdom Government to pay £420 million in compensation, with accrued interest, and to issue a public apology to the victims’ families and the people of Enugu State. The judgment has since sparked widespread public debate and renewed interest in colonial-era injustices.
While expressing deep sympathy for the families of the slain miners, Onoh cautioned against misconceptions surrounding the legal implications of the ruling.
“I deeply empathise with the families of the slain miners and fully acknowledge the historical injustice and pain inflicted on our people during colonial rule,” he said. “However, it is important to state clearly, as a matter of law and international relations, that this judgment is not enforceable or binding on the United Kingdom Government.”
Onoh explained that Nigerian courts lack jurisdiction to entertain claims against a foreign sovereign state unless that state expressly submits to such jurisdiction or waives its immunity.
“A Nigerian court, including a State High Court, has no jurisdiction over a foreign sovereign like the United Kingdom unless there is clear consent,” he stated. “In this case, the UK did not participate in the proceedings, did not enter appearance, and did not waive its sovereign immunity. Consequently, the court lacked international competence over the defendant.”
He further cited the doctrine of state sovereignty, noting that sovereign immunity is a core principle of customary international law that shields foreign states from being sued in the domestic courts of another country for official acts, including those carried out during colonial administration.
“This principle is recognised globally,” Onoh said, “including in the United Kingdom under the State Immunity Act of 1978, and in Nigeria through common law and international legal norms.”
According to him, for any foreign judgment to be recognised or enforced in the UK, the issuing court must have exercised proper international jurisdiction.
“A judgment obtained in breach of sovereign immunity would be treated as a nullity by UK courts and would not be enforceable under private international law or any reciprocal enforcement framework,” he added.
Onoh also noted that the events of 1949 occurred when Nigeria was still under colonial rule and had not attained sovereignty, stressing that such historical grievances are better pursued through alternative legal and diplomatic avenues.
“Post-independence claims of this nature are best addressed through diplomatic engagement, bilateral negotiations, international human rights mechanisms, or proceedings initiated directly in the courts of the responsible state,” he said. “Unilateral municipal court orders against foreign sovereigns do not create binding legal obligations.”
He described the judgment as morally significant but legally limited.
“This ruling is symbolically powerful and reflects our collective resolve to confront historical wrongs,” Onoh said. “However, in practical and legal terms, it does not impose any enforceable obligation on the UK Government to pay compensation or issue an apology.”
Onoh urged stakeholders to balance the moral weight of the judgment with the realities of international law, calling for sustained diplomatic advocacy between Nigeria and the United Kingdom.
“True redress for the Iva Valley victims and their descendants may be more effectively achieved through historical acknowledgment and constructive engagement at the highest levels of both governments,” he said.
He concluded by reaffirming his commitment to justice and historical accountability.
“I remain committed to supporting efforts that promote justice, historical accountability, and the dignity of Nigerians,” Onoh stated.
