The House of Representatives has waded into allegations that the dismissal of a former Head of Business Development at Prestige Assurance Plc, Mrs. Ifeyinwa Edet, breached applicable labour laws and due process, following a petition submitted by the aggrieved employee seeking legislative intervention.

The petition was presented at plenary last Thursday by the member representing Oshodi/Isolo II Federal Constituency of Lagos State, Hon. Okey-Joe Onuakalusi, and was subsequently referred by Speaker Tajudeen Abbas to the House Committee on Public Petitions for legislative scrutiny.

The petition, addressed to the Speaker, urges the House to investigate the circumstances surrounding the termination of Edet’s employment and determine whether the company complied with relevant labour laws, its internal policies and principles of fair hearing in carrying out the dismissal.

According to the petition dated July 20, 2026, Edet’s employment with Prestige Assurance Plc was terminated on April 24, 2026. She contended that the process leading to her disengagement did not comply with applicable procedures and appealed to lawmakers to intervene.

Edet told the House that she joined the company in July 2021 as Head of Business Development with an annual business target of about ₦9 billion. She claimed that through sustained business development efforts, she grew her portfolio to approximately ₦25 billion by the end of the 2025 financial year.

She further stated that the company acknowledged her performance in a letter confirming her appointment in October 2022, which she said reflected management’s satisfaction with her contributions.

The petitioner argued that the reasons cited for ending her employment failed to take into account the nature of her responsibilities as a business development executive, noting that her duties frequently required her to meet clients, brokers and business partners outside the office during official working hours.

She also alleged that she was not afforded an opportunity to respond to the issues that culminated in the termination of her employment, contrary to the principles of fair hearing, and urged the House to determine whether due process was followed.

Edet further requested lawmakers to examine what she described as disparities in the exit arrangements between her and some former management staff, who, according to her, received different severance packages upon leaving the company.

The petitioner also asked the House to review Prestige Assurance Plc’s employment policies and corporate governance practices relating to staff disengagement to ascertain whether they comply with applicable labour and corporate governance standards.

Among the reliefs sought, Edet requested the House to facilitate what she described as equitable disengagement benefits, including the payment of outstanding entitlements and the release of an official vehicle, which she claimed she became entitled to under the company’s policy.

She also urged lawmakers to recommend measures that would strengthen compliance with labour laws and promote fairness and transparency in employment practices within corporate organisations.

Following the presentation of the petition, Speaker Abbas referred the matter to the House Committee on Public Petitions for investigation and further legislative action as may be appropriate.

The committee is expected to invite relevant parties to present their positions before making recommendations to the House.

As of the time of filing this report, Prestige Assurance Plc had neither been summoned by the committee nor publicly responded to the allegations contained in the petition. The claims remain allegations by the petitioner and are yet to be determined by the House Committee on Public Petitions or any court of competent jurisdiction.