Human Rights Activist and Senior
Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, Mr. Femi Falana, on Friday, filed a motion to
challenge the legality of the order of the Federal High Court in Abuja that
gave the Department of State Service, DSS, permission to detain the convener of
the RevolutionNow protest, Omoyele Sowore, for 45 days.
According to Falana, he was
briefed by Sowore to defend him.
Recall that Justice Taiwo Taiwo
had held that DSS which earlier requested for 90 days, was at liberty to return
for an extension of the detention order after September 21.
But Falana contended that the
order which the vacation judge granted on the strength of an exparte
application that was brought by the DSS, was illegal and unconstitutional.
The senior lawyer maintained that
the detention order breached the fundamental right provisions of the 1999
Constitution, as amended.
He specifically applied for, “An
order of this honourable court setting aside, discharging and/or vacating the
ex parte order of this Honourable Court for the detention of the
Respondent/Applicant for a period of 45 days made on the 8th August, 2019,
Coram: Taiwo Taiwo J, in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/879/2019 between State Security
Service V. Omoyele Sowore”.
He enumerated reasons why the
detention order should be quashed.
Falana argued that: “The
detention of the respondent/applicant for an initial 4 days period before the
grant of the ex-parte order is illegal by virtue of Section 35 of the 1999
Constitution (as amended).
“The order ex-parte brought
pursuant to Section 27 (1) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2013 was obtained by the
applicant/respondent to legalise an illegal detention by the applicant/respondent.
“The applicant/respondent dumped
the video evidence in support of its application on the Honourable Court whilst
the learned trial judge watched same in his chambers and not in the open court.
“The respondent/applicant was
arrested on Saturday 3rd August, 2019 before the planned protest that took
place on Monday 5th August, 2019 while he was already under the custody of the
Applicant/Respondent.
“The persons who participated in
the protests of 5th August, 2019 have been charged with unlawful assembly at
the Magistrate Courts at Ebute-Metta, Lagos State and Calabar, Lagos State.
“The applicant/respondent had
concluded investigation of this case and announced its findings.
“The Respondent/Applicant had
also volunteered statement to the Applicant/Respondent.
“At the time of the hearing of
the motion ex-parte, the respondent/applicant was in custody of the
applicant/respondent at Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable
Court.
“The day the motion ex-parte was
filed at the registry of this Honorable Court, the respondent/applicant was
allowed by the applicant/respondent to consult his Counsel, Mr. Femi Falana,
SAN on phone”.
He alleged that the motion
ex-parte was predicated on suppression and misrepresentation of material facts,
saying it constituted gross abuse of the court process.
“The Applicant/Respondent motion
exparte filed 5th August, 2019, did not disclose any fact capable of linking
the Respondent /Applicant to any terrorism activity.
“That in the same vein the motion
filed 5th August, 2019 did not in the supporting Affidavit allude to facts
linking the Respondents/Applicants to any terrorism activity.
“The Applicant’s detention has
exceeded the maximum period a court of law can allow the Respondent to detain
the Applicant in accordance with the provisions of Section 35 (4) (a) of the
Constitution of Nigeria (AS AMENEDED) 2011 which only empowered the
Applicant/Respondent to detain the Applicants for a maximum period of two
months from the date of their arrest.
“That the Order made on 8th
August, 2019 was based on a wrong presumption and mistake that the Complaint
against the respondent therein relates to terrorism.
“That by virtue of Section 293 of
the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, an application for the remand
of any suspect is to be made before a Magistrate Court.
“By virtue of the actions of the
Applicant/Respondent, the Respondents/Applicants right to life, dignity of
human person, health and freedom of movement are under threat as same is
currently being violated by the Respondent without any justification known to
law”, Falana argued.
In a supporting affidavit that
was deposed by Marshal Abubakar, Sowore was described as a human rights
Activist, blogger and the publisher of Sahara reporters’ news.
“That the Applicant/Respondent
had accused the Respondent/Applicant of committing a treasonable act for
calling on Nigerians to pour out on the streets on August 5, 2019 to protest
against government’s failure to improve the living conditions of Nigerians.
Attached hereto and marked Exhibit RN1 is a document confirming the assertion.
“That the protest called by the
Respondent/Applicant was scheduled to hold on the 5th August, 2019.
“That the Applicant was however
arrested on Saturday 3rd August, 2019.
“That the persons who
participated in the peaceful protests of 5th August, 2019 were arrested and
charged with unlawful assembly in the Magistrates Court at Ebute Meta, Lagos
State Oshogbo in Osun state and Calabar, Cross Rivers State. Attached hereto
and marked Exhibit RN2 is a document confirming the assertion.
“That on Wednesday, 7th August,
2019y, the Respondent/Applicant volunteered statement to the
Applicant/Respondent.
“That the Applicant however
brought an application seeking for an order of court detaining the
Respondent/Applicant pending the conclusion of investigation.
“That the Applicant/Respondent
had concluded the investigation of this case and had announced its findings.
Attached hereto and marked Exhibit RN3 is a document confirming the assertion.
“That the Nigeria Police Force
had also concluded investigation of this case and announced its findings.
Attached hereto and marked Exhibit RN4 is a document confirming the averment
“That as at the time the motion
ex parte was filed, the Respondent/Applicant was already in the custody of the
Applicant/Respondent at Abuja within the territorial jurisdiction of this
Honourable Court.
“That on the date the motion ex
parte was filed at the Registry of this Honourable Court; the
Respondent/Applicant was allowed to consult with his counsel; Mr Femi Falana,
SAN on the telephone.
“That the Application ex parte
for the detention of the Respondent/ Applicant did not disclose their
involvement in any terrorism related activity.
“That it will serve the interest
of justice if the order for the detention of the Respondent /Applicant is set
aside.
“That the investigation of the
Respondents/Applicants by Applicant/Respondent is not related to any terrorism
activity.
“That I know by virtue of my
training as a Legal Practitioner that it is duty- bound on the
Applicant/Respondent to present before this Honourable Court facts linking the
Respondent/Applicant to evidence of having committed acts of terrorism.
“That this honorable court has
the jurisdiction to set aside its own order made pursuant to an ex-parte
application.
“That unless this Honorable court
intervenes by ordering the Respondent to release the Applicants forthwith and
pay them adequate compensation for their illegal detention, the Applicants will
continue to languish in the Respondent’s custody without being charged to court”,
the deponent added.
Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everyday
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
hmmm, fraudulent document called constitution
ReplyDelete