- Home
- Economic Crime
- Court Restrains Police from Infringing Complainant’s Rights
Court Restrains Police from Infringing Complainant’s Rights
- By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
- Published December 3rd, 2009
- Economic Crime
- Unrated
A Lagos High Court, Igbosere, presided over by Justice Opeyemi Oke has dismissed an application filed by one Anthony Obasi, seeking to restrain the police from further arresting, harassing and detaining him based on the complaint of alleged crime of stealing and conversion of the sum of 101,000 Euros, about N19 million made against him by one Miss Chinwe Onwuemeka.
The judge also dismissed the N5, 000,000 damages being claimed by Obasi against the respondents for an alleged illegal and unconstitutional violation of his rights and instead, awarded N25,000 costs against him.
IN the judgement delivered on suit No m/119/09 in which Obasi is challenging his arrest and detention by the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and two to fifth respondents, following a written petition by Chinwe Onwuemeka (6th respondent), the court held that the police are investigating a complaint of a crime of stealing and conversion and therefore, should be allowed to do their statutory duty as provided by law. The court was of the view that the contractual relationship between Anthony Obasi and Chinwe Onwuemeka has a criminal flavour, adding that the only way to determine the sharpness of the flavour is by the taste, holding that it can only be done by the police.
Quoting Justice Niki Tobi(retired) of the Court of Appeal, Justice Oke said “ one of the functions of the police in this country and indeed in any democracy is the protection of the citizens and the prevention of crime”.
“Investigating a complaint that is criminal in nature is the duty of the police” she further said.
The judge held that the police, that is, the first to fifth respondents have the duty to investigate the complaint lodged in their office by Miss Onwuemeka, stressing that it is within the scope of police duties.
On whether the applicant’s right to personal liberty is absolute, the judge asserted that it is trite that the fundamental rights of a citizen is not absolute by virtue of Sections 35 and 45 of the 19999 constitution, positing that a citizen can be investigated, arrested and detained where there are reasonable grounds or belief that a crime has been committed.
Ruling on the applicant’s claim for N5 million damages over an alleged violation of his constitutional and fundamental rights, it was held that the police have a duty to act upon a complaint if it is criminal in nature. It was further held that by virtue of Sections 35 and 45 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the arrest and detention of Mr Obasi by the police are within the scope of their duty and therefore, the police are nor liable for damages because just as the applicant has right, the 6th respondent who is the complainant also has a right to have the p0olice investigate her complaint.
The Judge said “This honourable court is a court of justice and equity, and equity follows the law. A suspect being investigated by the police cannot run to court under the disguise that his fundamental right is being threatened by the police with the aim of frustrating the investigation or forestalling same”.
“From the foregoing, I hold that this application lacks merit and it is a ploy to prevent the police from investigating the complaint brought to them by the 6th respondent. I hereby dismiss same with N25, 000 costs” she concluded
The applicant Anthony Obasi had brought an application pursuant to Sections 33 to 37, 40 to 42 of the 19999 constitution, Order1 rule 1,3 and 6 and Order 4 rule 1 of Fundamental Human Rights Enforcement Rules 1979, seeking for a declaration that his arrest, harassment, detention, humiliation, torture and intimidation by the respondents, their agents, servants and privies are unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, wrongful, null and void in that the same constitutes violations of his fundamental rights.
He also sought for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further arresting, harassing, detaining, impounding his property, intimidating his family members and business associates on issues and facts arising from and connected with the matter set out in the statement of facts.
The applicant demanded the sum of N5 million as damages from the respondents for the aforesaid illegal and unconstitutional violation of his rights. Besides, he prayed for an order for the publication of an apology by the respondents in two national newspapers for their wrongful and illegal acts and for such further order or other orders as the court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.
The judge also dismissed the N5, 000,000 damages being claimed by Obasi against the respondents for an alleged illegal and unconstitutional violation of his rights and instead, awarded N25,000 costs against him.
IN the judgement delivered on suit No m/119/09 in which Obasi is challenging his arrest and detention by the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and two to fifth respondents, following a written petition by Chinwe Onwuemeka (6th respondent), the court held that the police are investigating a complaint of a crime of stealing and conversion and therefore, should be allowed to do their statutory duty as provided by law. The court was of the view that the contractual relationship between Anthony Obasi and Chinwe Onwuemeka has a criminal flavour, adding that the only way to determine the sharpness of the flavour is by the taste, holding that it can only be done by the police.
Quoting Justice Niki Tobi(retired) of the Court of Appeal, Justice Oke said “ one of the functions of the police in this country and indeed in any democracy is the protection of the citizens and the prevention of crime”.
“Investigating a complaint that is criminal in nature is the duty of the police” she further said.
The judge held that the police, that is, the first to fifth respondents have the duty to investigate the complaint lodged in their office by Miss Onwuemeka, stressing that it is within the scope of police duties.
On whether the applicant’s right to personal liberty is absolute, the judge asserted that it is trite that the fundamental rights of a citizen is not absolute by virtue of Sections 35 and 45 of the 19999 constitution, positing that a citizen can be investigated, arrested and detained where there are reasonable grounds or belief that a crime has been committed.
Ruling on the applicant’s claim for N5 million damages over an alleged violation of his constitutional and fundamental rights, it was held that the police have a duty to act upon a complaint if it is criminal in nature. It was further held that by virtue of Sections 35 and 45 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the arrest and detention of Mr Obasi by the police are within the scope of their duty and therefore, the police are nor liable for damages because just as the applicant has right, the 6th respondent who is the complainant also has a right to have the p0olice investigate her complaint.
The Judge said “This honourable court is a court of justice and equity, and equity follows the law. A suspect being investigated by the police cannot run to court under the disguise that his fundamental right is being threatened by the police with the aim of frustrating the investigation or forestalling same”.
“From the foregoing, I hold that this application lacks merit and it is a ploy to prevent the police from investigating the complaint brought to them by the 6th respondent. I hereby dismiss same with N25, 000 costs” she concluded
The applicant Anthony Obasi had brought an application pursuant to Sections 33 to 37, 40 to 42 of the 19999 constitution, Order1 rule 1,3 and 6 and Order 4 rule 1 of Fundamental Human Rights Enforcement Rules 1979, seeking for a declaration that his arrest, harassment, detention, humiliation, torture and intimidation by the respondents, their agents, servants and privies are unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, wrongful, null and void in that the same constitutes violations of his fundamental rights.
He also sought for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further arresting, harassing, detaining, impounding his property, intimidating his family members and business associates on issues and facts arising from and connected with the matter set out in the statement of facts.
The applicant demanded the sum of N5 million as damages from the respondents for the aforesaid illegal and unconstitutional violation of his rights. Besides, he prayed for an order for the publication of an apology by the respondents in two national newspapers for their wrongful and illegal acts and for such further order or other orders as the court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.
