The Nation Newspaper

Tag: ‘rights’ violation’

  • Court awards N200,000 damages against police, others for rights violation

    Justice  Chuka Obiozor of the Federal High Court in Lagos has awarded N200,000 against the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and eight others for breaching the fundamental rights of Okesuji Obatoyinbo and three others.

    The judge delivered a verdict in the suit filed last January 15.

    Through his lawyer, Richard Komolafe, the plaintiff sued over a landed property in Ilupeju, Lagos.

    The suit was supported by a nine-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Kunle Amosun and adopted by other applicants, namely Kunle Amosun, Eunice Obasohan and Stephen Ogunleye.

    Assistant Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police, Lagos State, one Patrick Atayero (ACP), Zone 2,  Adeniyi Adekunle (DSP), John Faluyi (ASP), Emmanuel Victor (Sergeant), also of Zone 2, Gbagada police station, Alex Gwarzah and Kayode Aiyetiwa are second  to ninth respondents.

    Although the respondents filed no process, Justice Obiozor held that the court “is entitled to look up its records suo motu” to do justice in the matter.

    He granted three of the five reliefs sought by the applicants.

    He held that the arrest of the applicants violated their fundamental rights as guaranteed by Section 35(1) of the 199 Constitution (as amended) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap 10, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

    The court also declared as unlawful, unjustifiable, illegal and unconstitutional the use of the second to the eighth respondents who are officers of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), pertaining to ownership of the land by the ninth respondent.

    Justice Obiozor said he had assessed the allegations against the applicants and “failed to find criminality in it to justify the arrest, threat, harassment and detention of the applicants by the second to the eighth respondents at the behest of the ninth respondent”.

    He said the action of the respondents, therefore, was tantamount to breach of the applicants fundamental rights.

    “Upon a careful review of the peculiar facts of this case, I find that the arrest , threat, harassment and detention of the applicants justify grant of relief,” he said.

    The court, therefore, fixed damages at N200,000 jointly and severally against the respondents.

    The trial judge, citing related decided cases, held: “The Police have no business dabbling in a question of ownership of land.

    “The ninth respondent, who purport to lay adverse claim to the land involved in this case ought to head for the courts to assert his right, if any, but not to use the Police to wrest possession or assert title.”

    While acknowledging that the exercise of authority by the police is enormous, he held that it was “to obviate the prospects for mendacious, vindictive and fictitious reports and possibility of the Police abusing their powers,  court insist that the citizen’s fundamental  rights remain sacrosanct and their breach can only be excused by lawful justification”.

    The applicants had accused the respondents of arresting, threatening to arrest, detaining  and violating their  fundamental rights over the landed property in Ilupeju, Lagos which ownership they claimed followed its purchase in 1972.

    They claimed to have initially let part of it to one Mrs Ilaka for an event centre but later decided to develop the land into residential housing units.

    Following threats of arrest and intimidation by the police  allegedly at the instance of the ninth defendant, the applicants approached the court.

    They prayed for a declaration that the action of the respondents constitutes a violation of their fundamental rights.

    They asked the court for a declaration that the respondents’ act of threatening and intimidating them, using second to the eighth respondents  who are officers of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), pertaining to ownership of the land is unlawful, unjustifiable, illegal and unconstitutional having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case.

    The applicants also prayed the court for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents or their agents from further arresting or detaining any of them or their workers over any matter relating to or pertaining to the land ownership, land development fee and land ratification payment between the applicants and the ninth respondent.

    They also asked the court for general damages against the respondents, jointly and severally.

  • Rights violation: Court asks police to pay Charly Boy N50m

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Nigeria Police Force, the Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner of Police, Abuja to pay musician, Charles Oputa (Charly Boy) N50million for violating his rights.

    Justice John Tsoho, in a judgment on Monday, also ordered the respondents to tender public apology to the applicant, which should be published in two national newspapers.

    The judgement was on a fundamental rights enforcement suit by Oputa, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/343/2018, filed on March 29 this year.

    The applicant had, in an affidavit, said policemen, numbering over 100 from the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Police Command, invaded the Unity Fountain in Abuja on August 8, 2017 and attacked him and his group with teargas canisters, hot water cannon and wild police dogs during the Resume or Resign protest when he led other activists to protest the prolonged absence of President Muhammadu Buhari from Nigeria on account of his medical vacation in the United Kingdom.

    He claimed that the attack by the policemen was so severe that he collapsed in the process and was rushed to the hospital.

    Oputa claimed that the police attacked them because of claims that their protest over the President’s absence, which had exceeded 90 days on the second day of their daily sit-out protest, had gone international and brought serious embarrassment to the country.

    Justice Tsoho, in the judgement rejected the respondents’ claim that miscreants invaded or stormed the premises of the protest. The judge said there was no evidence to support such claim.

    The judge said the applicant was entitled, under the Constitution, to stage a peaceful protest.

    Justice Tsoho noted that protest is a constitutionally guaranteed right, provided it is done peacefully.

    He further noted that even if miscreants were on the scene to hijack the protest, the respondents (the police) possess enough measures to dislodge such persons and maintain law and order.

    The judge noted that the respondents, in their counter affidavit, admitted that they resorted to using teargas canisters and hot water canon in order to disperse the ’miscreants’’ who suddenly took over the protest.

    Justice Tsoho said the respondents’ claim that the teargas canisters and hot water canon were not directed at the defendants lacks substance as teargas circulates and affects all persons around where it is expended.

    The judge held that the applicant disclosed a reasonable cause of action against the respondents.

    He further held that the respondents violated the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association as enshrined in sections 34, 39, and 40 of the Constitution.

    The judge was of the view that “the law is that the court has the right to grant redress to anyone whose right is violated and the Applicant is entitled to a remedy.”

     

  • Court orders police to pay Charly Boy N50m

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Nigeria Police Force, the Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner of Police, Abuja to pay musician, Charles Oputa (Charly Boy) N50million for violating his rights.

    Justice John Tsoho, in a judgment on Monday, also ordered the respondents to tender public apology to the applicant, which should be published in two national newspapers.

    The judgement was on a fundamental rights enforcement suit by Oputa, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/343/2018 , filed on March 29 this year.

    The applicant had, in an affidavit, said policemen, numbering over 100 from the Federal Capital Territory (FC() Police Command, invaded the Unity Fountain in Abuja on August 8, 2017 and attacked him and his group with teargas canisters, hot water cannon and wild police dogs during the Resume or Resign protest when he led other activists to protest the prolonged absence of President Muhammadu Buhari from Nigeria on account of his medical vacation in the United Kingdom.

    He claimed that the attack by the policemen was so severe that he collapsed in the process and was rushed to the hospital.

    Oputa claimed that the police attacked them because of claims that their protest over the President’s absence, which had exceeded 90 days on the second day of their daily sit-out protest, had gone international and brought serious embarrassment to the country.

    Justice Tsoho, in the judgement rejected the respondents’ claim that miscreants invaded or stormed the premises of the protest. The judge said there was no evidence to support such claim.

    Read Also: CBN revokes nine micro-finance banks’ licences

    The judge said the applicant was entitled, under the Constitution, to stage a peaceful protest.

    Justice Tsoho noted that protest is a constitutionally guaranteed right, provided it is done peacefully.

    He further noted that even if miscreants were on the scene to hijack the protest, the respondents (the police) possess enough measures to dislodge such persons and maintain law and order.

    The judge noted that the respondents, in their counter affidavit, admitted that they resorted to using teargas canisters and hot water canon in order to disperse the ’miscreants’’ who suddenly took over the protest.

    Justice Tsoho said the respondents’ claim that the teargas canisters and hot water canon were not directed at the defendants lacks substance as teargas circulates and affects all persons around where it is expended.

    The judge held that the applicant disclosed a reasonable cause of action against the respondents.

    He further held that the respondents violated the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association as enshrined in sections 34, 39, and 40 of the Constitution.

    The judge was of the view that “the law is that the court has the right to grant redress to anyone whose right is violated and the Applicant is entitled to a remedy.”

  • Dasuki sues DSS, AGF for ‘rights violation’

    Former National Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki has sued the State Security Service (SSS), its Director General Lawal Daura and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami over his continued detention.

    Dasuki has been in the custody of the SSS since December 29, 2015. The Community Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in a judgment delivered on October 4, 2016  declared his detention unlawful and ordered his release.

    In a fundamental rights enforcement suit marked filed on March 15 before the Federal High Court, Abuja, Dasuki is praying the court to order his unconditional release.

    He is also praying the court to award in his favour, and against the respondents, N5billion as “general damages and compensation” for the alleged violation of his rights.

    The ex-NSA wants the court to order the respondents to the suit to tender public apology to him in two  widely published newspapers for allegedly violating his rights “as enshrined under Sections 34(1), 35(1), (4) & (5), 37 & 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)”.

    Dasuki also wants the court to declare that the applicant is entitled to the dignity of his person, personal liberty, freedom of movement, private and family life as enshrined under Sections 34(1), 35(1), (4) & (5), 37 & 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

    “A declaration that the continued detention of the applicant, Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd), by the operatives of the 2nd respondent under the instruction and direction of the 1st respondent (Daura) since Tuesday December 29, 2015 till date violates his fundamental rights under Sections 34(1), 35(1), (4) & (5), 37 & 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Article 6 and 12 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap 10, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and is therefore unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void.

    The suit has been assigned to Justice Ahmed Mohammed , but no date has been scheduled for hearing.

  • Army visits Abia to investigate ‘rights’ violation’

    The Special Board of Enquiry set up by the Chief of Army Staff, Lt.-Gen. Tukur Buratai, to investigate human rights violation levelled against personnel of the Army in the Northeast and Internal Security Operations in the Southeast will not harass or witch hunt anybody.

    Board Chairman Maj.-Gen Hammad Tijani Jibrin (rtd) was fielding questions from reporters after a briefing by battalion commander Lt.- Col. Kasim Umar Sidi, on activities of his men.

    The briefing held at the Forward Operation Base (FOB) in Ngwa High School, Aba.

    He said members of the Board were in Abia State, after visiting other states in the Southeast, to probe what happened on February 9, 2016, at National High School, Aba, where soldiers allegedly killed 10 members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

    “It was alleged that IPOB members gathered at National High school and when it turned violent, the police left and when soldiers came, they opened fire and killed 10 people and buried their bodies in a shallow grave on the Aba/Port Harcourt Expressway. That’s what we came to investigate.

    “We have discussed with the state government and we are here, in Aba, to go to the school and talk to people who must have witnessed the incident, and soldiers who conducted the operation,” Col. Jibrin said.

    When asked if the board would meet with MASSOB and IPOB members, Col. Jibrin said: “If they want to see us, we are ready, but we are not going to look for them because they didn’t complain. It was human rights groups that brought all these allegations”.