An Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan, the Oyo state capital on Friday famous that each Nigerian has proper to self-determination with out being intimidated or harassed by the safety businesses.
Justice Ladiran Akintola said this whereas delivering judgement in a case instituted by the Yoruba Nation agitator, Chief Sunday Adeyemo, popularly known as Sunday Igboho towards the Nigerian authorities and the Attorney General of Federation, Abubakar Malami.
This adopted the raid on Igboho’s Ibadan residence on July 1 throughout which the Department of State Services (DSS) killed two individuals and arrested 12 others.
Aside from ordering the Nigerian authorities to pay Igboho a sum of N20 billion as compensation as a substitute of the N500 billion demanded by the petitioner, the court docket restrained the Nigerian authorities from harassing, intimidating or arresting the separatist chief.
The decide dismissed the first objection of the respondents which challenged the jurisdiction of the court docket in listening to the case.
Counsel for Igboho had approached the court docket in July to problem the raid on his shopper’s home by the DSS.
While giving the judgement on the matter, Justice Akintola mentioned, “First respondent files a notice of preliminary objection, objecting the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the case on the grounds that the case cannot be brought under fundamental human rights, that the court lacks the jurisdiction.
“Having rigorously thought-about the primary respondent’s discover of preliminary objection, along with written submission of the counsel on one hand, and then again, having additionally thought-about the written submission of the discovered senior counsel to the applicant respondent, this court docket is of the opinion that the actual fact of this case, as contained within the affidavit, and additional affidavit in assist of the originating discover, recommended that the second and third respondents and their brokers, invaded the house of the applicant; that interference with the quiet enjoyment of the applicant of his home is trespass, and breached of the personal and household lifetime of the applicant.
“In the final analysis, this court finds no merit in the preliminary objection taken by the first respondent applicant in the originating application of the applicant for the enforcement of his fundamental human rights, allegedly violated by the second and third respondents in this case. The same is consequently hereby dismissed.
“This court docket is unable to rule that the second and third respondents have a reliable discover of preliminary objection earlier than this court docket on this swimsuit. The identical is invalid and incompetent, not having been signed neither by the events nor by their counsel on this swimsuit. Consequently, the purported discover of preliminary objection is accordingly hereby struck out. The identical is incurably faulty and incompetent in regulation.”
Speaking further on the main suit, Justice Akintola said, “The reckless and indiscriminate capturing undertaken by the second and third respondents and their brokers, which resulted within the loss of life of two individuals of the applicant, was in itself, a menace to the lifetime of the applicant. Nobody shoots weapons so as of leisure of individuals. Such a conduct has a critical potential of killing the sufferer, and at finest constitutes a critical menace to the lives of the individuals.
“It is difficult to believe that the cache of arms and ammunition allegedly recovered from the residence of the applicant really came to bear. Even, for the sake of argument, the defence of the second and third respondents into the relief, that the presumed, they gathered intelligence, that the applicant was in possession of arms and ammunition at his residence, with which to cede the control of the South West to Lagos.
“In the absence of any proof that Nigeria was in a state of struggle, the type and process adopted by the second and third respondents and their brokers on this case, is very condemnable, repressible, crude and most unprofessional. Every Nigerian has proper to self-determination as enumerated in authorities earlier said.
“With the benefit of the hindsight, given the number of guns, arms allegedly recovered from the premises of the applicant on the fateful night, relative to the harms, damage and deaths, plus trauma inflicted on, not only the applicant, his households, guests, and neighborhood, it is very doubtful if it was worth the exercise at all.
“It was not solely the applicant that will have been traumatised by the overzealousness and recklessness of the second and third respondents and their brokers. The total neighbourhood of the applicant’s residence was thrown into critical squabbles and troubles.
“The style adopted by the second and third respondents in the case should be condemned in strongest possible terms, especially given the fact that they are maintained by the Nigerian taxpayers. And yet they did not hesitate to unleash such mayhem on a Nigerian citizen, who has not been pronounced guilty of any crime by any court of the land.”