The Archbishop of the Province of the Niger and Bishop of the Diocese of Awka, Anglican Communion, Most Reverend Alexander Chibuzo Ibezim, has approached the Anambra State High Court to challenge the six-month compulsory leave issued to him by the leadership of the Church of Nigeria.
It will be recalled that in a letter dated October 13, Primate of the Church of Nigeria, Most Reverend Henry Ndukuba, informed Archbishop Ibezim of the church’s decision directing him to proceed on a six-months compulsory leave pending the resolution of investigations into allegations involving him and the Diocese of Awka.
However, after the directive, Ibezim filed an originating summons on October 13 at the High Court, Awka Division, seeking judicial interpretation of the church’s constitution and canons regarding disciplinary proceedings against a serving bishop and archbishop.
The archbishop named the Metropolitan and Primate of All Nigeria, Ndukuba, as the first defendant, while the Dean of the Church of Nigeria, Most Reverend Blessing Enyindah, who chairs a visitation team to the Diocese of Awka, was listed as the second defendant.
In the court filing, Ibezim described the visitation team, constituted by the Primate through a letter dated June 17, 2026, as ‘illegally constituted.’
The suit seeks three major declarations from the court.
First, Ibezim is asking the court to declare that disciplinary proceedings against a serving diocesan bishop must strictly comply with the procedures prescribed by the 2020 Constitution and Canons of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion).
He specifically cited sections 55 and 75 to 76 of the constitution, alongside sections 22 to 28 of Canon XVI, arguing that the stipulated procedures must be followed before any disciplinary sanction, including suspension or removal from office as Bishop of Awka and Archbishop of the Province of the Niger, can be imposed.
Second, the archbishop wants the court to determine that at least one of the ten offences listed under Section 1 of Canon XVI must be established before disciplinary action can be taken against him.
Third, he is seeking an interpretation of several provisions across Canons V, VI, VII, IX, XII, XIV, XV, XVI and XVII, which he says regulate the duties, powers and disciplinary responsibilities of the various offices within the church.
No date has been fixed for hearing by the court.
