“No Charge Has Been Brought Against Me And No Trial Has Taken Place” — Archbishop Ibezim Challenges Alleged Suspension Threat In Court

The Archbishop of the Province of the Niger and Bishop of the Diocese of Awka, Most Rev. Alexander Chibuzo Ibezim, PhD, has approached the High Court of Anambra State seeking to restrain the Primate of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), Most Rev. Henry C. Ndukuba, and the Dean of the Church, Most Rev. Blessing Enyindah, from suspending, removing or compulsorily retiring him without first complying with the disciplinary procedures prescribed by the Church’s Constitution and Canons.

Ibezim commenced the action by an originating summons in Suit No. A/371/2026 before the Awka Judicial Division of the High Court, naming Ndukuba as first defendant and Enyindah, who chaired the Visitation Team to the Diocese of Awka, as second defendant. The court process is dated October 13, 2026.

The Archbishop is asking the court to determine, among other questions, whether any disciplinary measure can lawfully be imposed on a serving Bishop or Archbishop without strict compliance with Sections 55, 75 and 76 and the relevant provisions of Canon XVI of the Constitution and Canons of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), 2020.

He is also asking the court to determine whether at least one of the ten offences expressly listed under Canon XVI must first be established before a Bishop or Archbishop can be sanctioned. Those offences include conviction for a felony or allied offence, sexual immorality, conduct giving just cause for scandal, heresy, schism, apostasy, violation of the Church Constitution, disobedience, neglect of official duties and membership of a secret society or cult coupled with refusal to renounce it.

Ibezim is further seeking a declaration that, on a proper interpretation of the Church’s Constitution and Canons, the Primate lacks unilateral authority to query, suspend, dismiss, remove, retire or demand the resignation of a serving Bishop or Archbishop outside the disciplinary machinery established by the Church.

He specifically challenges what he described in his court papers as threats allegedly made during a meeting on October 9, 2026, to suspend, remove, retire or dismiss him from his offices.

The Archbishop wants the court to declare such threatened measures “unconstitutional, illegal, unlawful, ultra vires, null and void and of no effect whatsoever” if undertaken without compliance with the prescribed disciplinary process.

A central plank of his case is his contention that Section 4 of Canon X entitles him to remain Bishop of the Diocese of Awka until the age of 70.

He consequently seeks orders restraining the defendants and persons acting through them from issuing or serving any letter of suspension, removal, retirement or dismissal capable of truncating his tenure before he reaches the prescribed retirement age.

He is also seeking to restrain the defendants from interfering in the affairs of the Diocese of Awka without his written consent or, after his retirement, that of his successors, together with the consent of the Diocesan Board, Diocesan Synod and Registered Trustees of the Diocese.

Alongside the substantive action, Ibezim filed a motion on notice in A/1759M/2026, seeking interlocutory injunctions to preserve his position pending determination of the suit.

The first injunction seeks to stop the defendants from issuing or implementing any suspension, removal, retirement or dismissal against him, while the second seeks to prevent further interference with the affairs of the Diocese pending the court’s final decision.

The originating summons and accompanying affidavit provide a detailed account of the internal dispute which preceded the litigation.

Ibezim said he had served as the elected Bishop of the Diocese of Awka since 2010 and described himself as the spiritual leader of Anglicans within his ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Anambra State.

According to his sworn account, the controversy began with a letter dated July 28, 2025, concerning allegations about the management and disposal of assets belonging to the Diocese of Awka.

He alleged that the Primate subsequently constituted a Panel of Inquiry on August 13, 2025, into the management and disposal of assets of the Church of Nigeria, Diocese of Awka, under his leadership.

Ibezim said he appeared before that panel on August 29 and 30, 2025, filed a preliminary objection challenging its competence and nevertheless gave evidence before it.

He alleged that the complainant did not appear before the panel despite being invited and that, although the panel concluded its assignment and submitted a report to the Primate, his requests for a copy of the report were refused.

The Archbishop said that instead of releasing the first panel’s report, the Primate constituted another body by a letter dated June 17, 2026, styled the Visitation Team to the Diocese of Awka, with the Dean, Archbishop Enyindah, as chairman.

In the originating summons, Ibezim described the team as having been “illegally constituted” by the Primate, an allegation that remains for the court to determine.

He said he appeared before the Visitation Team on July 23, 2026 and alleged that the complainant again failed to appear.

According to him, rather than dismissing the allegations, the team turned the process into what he described as an “inquisition” and improperly shifted the burden of disproving the accusations onto him.

He further alleged that the Visitation Team submitted its findings to the Primate in July, but that the report was again withheld from him.

Ibezim contends that the report was also not submitted to the Episcopal Synod, Standing Committee and General Synod for consideration and ratification in the sequence which he says Sections 75 and 76 require.

Under those provisions, according to the materials placed before the court, a complaint against a Bishop is to be forwarded to him for a response, after which a seven-member committee is constituted to investigate and report.

The findings are then to pass through the Episcopal Synod, Standing Committee and ultimately General Synod, whose decision is stated to be final and binding.

A substantially similar procedure applies to complaints against a Provincial Archbishop. Pasted markdown

Ibezim said the failure to follow that process effectively “truncated the internal dispute resolution mechanism” established by the Church and made his resort to the civil court inevitable.

The Archbishop’s affidavit gives particular prominence to a meeting allegedly held on October 9, 2026.

He claimed that during the meeting, the Primate told him that he had performed very well as Bishop of Awka and that the projects completed under his leadership demonstrated his competence and ability.

He further alleged that he was informed that the Visitation Team had made no adverse findings against him except what were described as “administrative errors” in the management of the Diocese.

Ibezim alleged that despite this, the Primate said he “must punish” him for the administrative errors and presented him with two options.

According to the affidavit, the first option was a four-month suspension from his offices as Archbishop of the Province of the Niger and Bishop of the Diocese of Awka.

The second, he alleged, was that he should remain in office for another nine months and thereafter be compulsorily retired.

Ibezim said he was asked to select one of the two options and communicate his choice to the Primate by October 19, 2026.

He said he challenged the defendants to identify the provision of the Church Constitution empowering the Primate to impose either sanction, alleging that they were unable to point to such authority.

The Archbishop further alleged that despite requesting the Visitation Team’s report through a letter signed by the Chancellor of the Diocese of Awka, the report was not released to him.

Ibezim’s case is that no formal charge relating to any of the ten offences listed under Canon XVI has been brought against him; no Articles of Presentment have been served on him; and no ecclesiastical trial has taken place before the Primate and the required number of Bishops.

He relies particularly on Canon XVI, which provides that a Bishop against whom charges are brought is to be tried before a court consisting of the Primate and Bishops of the Church of Nigeria, with no trial taking place unless at least six Bishops, including the Primate but excluding the accused, are present.

The Canons further provide for Articles of Presentment, service on the accused, time limits for trial and the appointment of assessors, with sanctions such as admonition, censure, suspension or deprivation following only after trial and a finding of guilt.

Ibezim therefore maintains that disciplinary punishment cannot validly precede the processes established by those provisions.

In his affidavit, he described the threatened actions against him in strongly worded terms, alleging that they were motivated by “mischief, envy, wickedness and hatred for no just cause.”

He also told the court that unless urgent protection was granted, he would suffer “irreparable, irretrievable and outrageous damage and injury and injustice which no monetary award can assuage.” Pasted markdown

The defendants have 42 days from service of the originating summons to enter an appearance, according to the filed process.

.. “No Charge Has Been Brought Against Me And No Trial Has Taken Place” — Archbishop Ibezim Challenges Alleged Suspension Threat In Court … NewsNGR.