Court Orders Awards N20.5Million Against Nigeria’s Police Boss Egbetokun Over Illegal Detention For 46 Days
The judgment, delivered on December 17, 2024, was presided over by Hon. Justice A. A. Halilu, who condemned the actions of the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, and declared the detention as unlawful.
The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sitting in Apo, has awarded N20 million in damages to Mohammed Abubakar over what it described as illegal arrest and detention, as well as the violation of his fundamental rights to dignity and personal liberty.
The judgment, delivered on December 17, 2024, was presided over by Hon. Justice A. A. Halilu, who condemned the actions of the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, and declared the detention as unlawful.
The case, filed on June 3, 2024, under suit number CV/3079/2024, detailed a series of events leading to Abubakar’s detention.
Abubakar’s counsel, I. B. Ahmad, Esq, sought nine reliefs against the Respondent – the Inspector General of Police, citing gross violations of his client’s rights.
The incident began in May 2024 when a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and former Kuje Area Council chairmanship candidate, Hon. Hamidu Sarki Gaube, was shot and killed by unidentified gunmen in Kuje, Abuja.
The assailants also kidnapped three passengers in his vehicle, leaving one person to escape. The murder and abductions caused a ripple of security concerns in the area.
On May 10, 2024, Mukaila, a resident of Gaube, sought help in Abaji town to deliver ransom payments to the kidnappers.
He approached a commercial motorcyclist union member, Taller, who introduced him to Mohammed Abubakar, the Applicant. Upon discovering they shared the same tribal background, Mukaila disclosed details of the ransom delivery and the location of the kidnappers in Chikara village.
It was learnt that Abubakar, attempting to assist Mukaila, arranged transportation for him to the kidnappers’ location.
However, due to reluctance from other motorcyclists, Abubakar eventually took Mukaila to the site himself.
Upon arriving, the kidnappers seized their phones and ordered Abubakar to transport another ransom bearer to the same location.
Abubakar complied under duress and facilitated the ransom delivery.
Despite the payments, the kidnappers failed to release the hostages as promised, prompting further interactions between Abubakar, the ransom bearers, and the kidnappers.
On May 12, 2024, Abubakar was summoned to the Abaji Police Station, where he was arrested and subsequently transferred to the Anti-Kidnapping Unit in Life Camp, Abuja.
Meanwhile, while in police custody, Abubakar endured severe beatings and was reportedly pressured to confess to crimes he did not commit.
Despite the withdrawal of the complaint by the complainants—relatives of the kidnapped victims—Abubakar remained in detention for 46 days, far exceeding the legally permissible duration.
Efforts by his family and legal counsel to secure his release were ignored.
However, Abubakar was eventually released on July 1, 2024, after two detainees in the same facility died, highlighting the dire conditions of his incarceration.
His counsel argued that his prolonged detention, despite the proximity of the court to the detention facility, constituted a clear breach of his fundamental rights.
In his ruling, Justice Halilu stated: “In support of the above-stated facts, the Applicant filed a written address wherein a sole issue for determination was formulated, to wit: Having regard to the averments in the Applicant’s affidavit, I do not find it convoluted to resolve this application.
“This is because my task here is not to determine whether the Applicant was involved in the alleged kidnapping but rather to assess whether the Applicant’s fundamental rights, as enshrined in Chapter IV of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), have been violated by the Respondent in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.
“I will therefore formulate an issue below for determination upon which I shall proceed to dispose of this application to wit: Whether the Applicant have proved his case as required by Law in view of the affidavit evidence in support of his originating motion and the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case to warrant the grant of his reliefs sought?
“It is clearly shown in the averment of the Applicant’s affidavit in support of his originating summons that the Applicant was detained for both in the SWAT as well as the Lifecamp Police Detention Facility for a total number of 46 days without being charge to Court.”
He said respondent who were served with the processes of the Applicant are duty bound to file their response being the detaining authority to justify the reasons for the Applicant’s detention on reasonable ground and the Respondent did not file anything to either deny or justify the arrest and detention of the Applicant for about 46 days without taking him to Court.
It said, “It is not in doubt that the Police in such a situation acted ultra vires of their duty thereby overreaching its powers. While the Police is saddled with the responsibility to arrest, investigate and prosecute the suspect they are also required by law to observe their procedural ethics and also adhere to the timelines of their duties as enshrined in the Police Act and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“In view of the foregoing, I believed the Applicant’s deposition as contained in the Applicant’s affidavit that his fundamental right to dignity of human person as well as personal liberty contrary to Sections 34 and 35 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) has been breached by the Respondent and the Applicant is entitle to the reliefs sought.”
The court ruled in favour of the Applicant, saying, “Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Applicant on the following terms:- ‘I declared that the arrest and detention of the Applicant by the officers of the Respondent from the 12/5/2024 to 1/7/2024 without the order of Court amounts to a violation of the Applicant’s fundamental right to dignity of human person and right to personal liberty pursuant to Section 34 and 35 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).’
“I order that the Respondent should pay the sum of Twenty Million Naira (N20,000,000.00) to the Applicant for the violation of the Applicant’s fundamental right.
“Order is granted restraining the Respondent by themselves, their officers and agents from further detaining the Applicant in their detention facility but can proceed to prosecute him before a Court of Law if their investigation discloses a prima facie case against the Applicant.”
“I assessed the cost of this suit to the tune of Five Hundred Thousand Naira (N500,000.00) to be paid to the Applicant by the Respondent,” Justice Halilu said.
