Court restrains security agencies from arresting Kashamu

www.twitter.com/platform9ja


JUSTICE Okong Abang of the Federal High Court, Lagos on Monday restrained the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Mohammed Abubakar and the State Security Services (SSS) from arresting a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Ogun State, Prince Buruji Kashamu on the basis of a petition written against him.
   The court also restrained the Comptroller-General, Nigerian Customs Service; Chairman of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) and former Ogun State Governor, Gbenga Daniel from prosecuting the applicants.
   Justice Abang awarded N50,000 cost against Daniel.
   In an Originating Motion, Kashamu had sought a declaration that the allegations contained in a petition dated December 18, 2009, by a group – “Concerned Citizens of Ogun State” – to the police, SSS, Customs and NDLEA are false.
   In the petition, the group alleged that Kashamu was under the United States FBI investigation bordering on criminality, narcotic smuggling, amongst others; was indicted by a grand jury in the U.S. and was declared a fugitive by a U.S. Federal High Court.
   The applicant said the allegations were subject of previous investigation by the International Police (Interpol) and litigation in competent courts, which exonerated him.
   Kashamu said the allegations were “rehashed” by his political opponents allegedly led by Daniel “in a maliciously contrived attempt to breach the applicant’s fundamental right to liberty and freedom of association.”

   According to the applicant, the petition was written to instigate the first to fifth respondents to arrest, detain and humiliate him “through malicious criminal prosecution” and to neutralise him “as a perceived threat to the sixth respondent’s (Daniel’s) political designs in Ogun State.”
   Kashamu, therefore, sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining the first to fifth respondents from intimidating, arresting, detaining or prosecuting him.
   In his judgment, Justice Abang held that going by the facts before him, there was no evidence that the applicant committed any of the offences mentioned in “the ill-motivated” petition.
   “I think that the court can restrain the first to fifth defendants from acting on the petition, which may lead to the violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement,” Justice Abang held.
   The judge added that his restraining the police is an exception to the principle that the force cannot be restrained from carrying out its constitutional responsibility.
   “The findings made in this case are based on peculiar facts and circumstances. This is a case where the court will have expected the sixth respondent (Daniel) to come forward and prove the allegations made by him against the applicant. But this is not the case,” the judge said.
   “Upon being served with the court processes, the sixth respondent only briefed a counsel that appeared in court once and later abandoned the proceeding. I think the suit of the applicant deserves to succeed,” the judge said.