12th December
The Hon. Attorney General of the Federation,
Attorney General Chambers,
Federal Ministry of Justice,
Abuja.
Sir;
RE: MR. BRIGHT CHIMEZIE VS STATE SECURITY SERVICES
SUIT NO: FHC/UY/CS/61/2017
:CONTINUED DETENTION OF BRIGHT CHIMEZIE IN CLEAR VIOLATION
OF COURT ORDER
:A THREAT TO DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTION AND AN AFFRONT TO
JUDICIAL PROCESS.
Above captioned suit refers.
We are Solicitors to Mr. Bright Chimezie (the Applicant in
the above referenced suit) and hereinafter referred to as “Our Client” and on
whose definite instruction we enter into this correspondence with your good
office.
Our Client was arrested by the operatives of the State
Security Services in Uyo,AkwaIbom State, on the 14th day of October, 2016.
Following his continued detention in the most dreaded
custody of the SSS, and their refusal to either charge him to Court if he had
committed any offence known to Law or release him on bail, we filed an
application for the enforcement of his Fundamental Rights in the civil Suit
above captioned.
All processes filed in the suit were all served on the State
Security Services, before the substantive application was heard on the merit.
By order made in the Suit under reference, His Lordship Hon.
Justice IJEOMA L. OJUKWU of Court No 1, Federal High Court Uyo declared; and
consequently directed as follows;
1. “That the arrest of the Applicant (Bright Chimezie) on
the 14th/10/2016, and his continued detention by the Respondent without
granting him bail or being charged to Court is unlawful and a gross violation
of his Fundamental Right to personal liberty under Section 35(1 and 93) of the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
2. That the Respondent is herebyordered to release the
Applicant on bail or charge him before any Court of competent jurisdiction
where there is a prima facie case of commission of crime.
3. That since the Law recognizes that where a citizen has
been detained above the constitutionally prescribed period without any
justification; any subsequent arraignment or charge before a Court of Law does
not cure the illegality or abrogate his right to damages, he is entitle to
damages for unlawful detention. Therefore the Respondent shall pay the sum of
N5,000,000.00 (Five million naira) only, to the Applicant as damages for the
unlawful detention of the Applicant from 14/10/2016 till date.”
Herein attached for your ease of reference is the order of
Court, made on the 24thday of May 2017, above quoted. It was served on the
State Security Services, the receipt of which was duly acknowledged.
On the 30th day of May 2017, a formal communication was
submitted with the Director General of the State Security Services, requesting
him to obey the order of Court, still the order was treated with brazen
contempt and disdain, as our Client was neither releasedon bail, nor charged to
Court.
Following the continued detention of our Client in flagrant
disobedience ofthe positive orders of the Court, we initiated a formal contempt
proceedings against the Director of State Security Services, through the filing
and service on them, the requisite statutory forms (Forms 48 and 49), Notice of
consequences of disobedience to Court Order, and Notice to show cause why the
Director of State Security Services will not be committed to prison for his
failure to obey Court Orders.
Also attached for your ease of referenceare the above
referred forms.
However, in a desperate but unavailing charade to present an
impression of strict compliance with the directives , contained in the order
made on the 24th day of May, 2017, the name of the Applicant was smuggled in as
the 5th Defendant in charge No: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015 between FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF
NIGERIA VS NNAMDI KANU & ORS.
In the amended chargedated 21st day of June, 2017 and filed
on the same date, our Client was charged with two offences to wit: (a)
Conspiracy to commit treasonable felony and (b) Improper importation of goods.
The Attorney General is therefore invited to take note of
these salient points as a manifestation of obvious acts of malafide on the part
of State Security Services, acting under the strict directive of the State;
1. The two Count charge preferred against our Client in the
amended charge, contained offences which are ordinarily bailable in law, such
that may not warrantor justify the detention of a subject beyond the statutory
prescribed period, before being released on bail.
2. Charge No FHC/ABJ/CS/383/2015 above referred was first
amended on the 7thday of November 2016, when our Client had spent well over23
daysin the custody of the State Security Services, still he was not joined as a
party, if truly he had committed any offence known to Law.
3. The State Security Services suddenly remembered that our
Client should be charged to court, only when the Court order compelling them to
either release our Client on bail or charge him to Court was served on them on
the25thday of May 2017.
4. Since the amendment of the charge on the 21st day of
June, 2017 vide the inclusion of our Client as the 5th Defendant in the amended
charge, he has not been produced before the Federal High Court seized of the
matter for the purposes of taking pleas to the charge, till date.
5. On record, the charge came up on the 17th day of October,
2017,November 20th, 2017, and 5th December, 2017, but on all of the above
dates, our client was not produced in Court, neither was the said amended
charge ever mentioned in Court.
6. When the plight of our client was formally brought to the
attention of the Court, and the facts of the existing Court order of coordinate
jurisdiction directing the State Security Services to release him, His Lordship
(Hon. Justice Binta Nyako) declined to comment on the amended charge, as
according to my noble Lord, Our Client has not been brought before her, so that
she cannot assume jurisdiction over a charge that has not been read or
mentioned before her.
7. Implicit in the antics of the State Security Services is
that they are in law, still holding our client in clear disobedience of
positive orders of Court that directed them to release Our Client.
It is more so, when the constitution of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria 1999 as amended 2011, provides in Section 35(1) (c) & (4) (a)
& (b), thus
a. Any person who is arrested or detained in accordance with
subsection (1)(c) of this section. For the purpose of bringing him before a
Court in execution of the order of a Court or upon reasonable suspicion of his
having committed a criminal offence or to such extent as may be reasonably
necessary to prevent his committing a criminal offences shall be brought before a Court of Law within
a reasonable time, and if he is not tried within a period of;
a. Two months from the date of his arrest or detention in
the case of person who is in custody or
is not entitled to bail; or
b. Three months from the date of his arrest or detention in
the case of a person who has been released on bail.
He shall (without prejudice to any further proceedings that
may be brought against him) be releasedeither unconditionally or upon such
conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure that he appears for trial at a
later date.
The above provision of the constitution is unequivocal on
the length of time a subject can be detained without trial, and his inalienable
right to unconditional release when detained in the manner our client has been
detained. It is crystal clear that our Client has spent well over 14 months in
the custody of the State Security Services without trial. His continued
detention is unlawful, illegal and in flagrant violation of both the positive
orders of Court and relevant provisions of the Constitution above referred.
It is our respectful submission Sir, that to allow a
flagrant disobedience of orders of Court is to strike hard at the foundation of
the rule of Law and thereby unwittingly bring about anarchy. See the dictum of
ADEREMU JCA in ODUNSI VS ABEKE (2000) All FWLR (Pt. 10) 1625.Justice in its
total practical content is truth in action!
Justice is much more than a game of hide and seek. Our
Client is therefore entitled to unconditional bail in the prevailing
circumstance, and we respectfully urge you Sir, to use your good office to
prevail on the State Security Services to release our Client without further
ado.
Recall that you are under constitutional Oath as the Chief
LawOfficer of the Federation, to protect and ensure absolute allegiance to the
letters and dictates of the Supreme Law of the land. You can only be failing in the performance of
this solemn duty, if after receiving this letter, you still allows our Client
to spend another night in the dreaded custody of the State Security Services.
We respectfully observe therefore, that the administration
of Justice is the firmest pillar of government. We implore you most
respectfully Sir, to respect the sanctity of the judicial process, and
accordingly give effect to positive orders of Court of competent jurisdiction
by directing the release of Our Client without further prompting.
State Security Services is a creation of the Law and is at
all times, expected to operate within the confines of Laws establishing the
Agency, and not above the law.
It is the height of executive rascality and brazen impunity
to allow positive orders of Court to be treated with disdain and contempt by
the very Agency they supervise. It is time to put a stop to this impunity.
Harming one’s inalienable right in order to serve any sinister motive is
injustice.
Only last week, the President, Commander in Chief of the
Armed Forces Federal Republic of Nigeria, Alhaji Muhammadu Buhari, granted
state pardon to over 500 (Five hundred) prison inmates, detained on various
violent offences in Kano Maximum Security Prison. The freed inmates were
further treated with cash gifts containing unspecified sums of Money.
While
commending the Commander in Chief for such a patriotic act, we respectfully
wish to implore the President to extend the same gestures to hundreds of
innocent and defenseless members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB),
largely made up of Youths of Igbo extraction, held across the various prisons
in the south East States and Kuje Prison in the Federal Capital Territory,on
accounts of phantom charges, frivolous and cooked-up allegations, for merely
exercising their constitutional guaranteed Rights to self determination ,
including our Client who has been held in the custody of the SSS for over 14
months without trial. What is good for the goose is also good for the gander!
If the President is a true Nationalist, he should do the needful in this
regard, without further prompting.
One sided justice will amount to injustice!
See the dictum of Oputa JSC of the most blessed memory in WILLOUGHBY VS
INTERNATIONAL MERCHANTS BANK (NIG)LTD (1987)1NWLR
In anticipation of your expeditious response in this regard,
accept the assurances of our deepest regards.
Yours Faithfully,
FOR: I.C. EJIOFOR & CO.
____________________________
Hon. Ifeanyi Ejiofor Esq.
(Principal Partner)
No comments:
Post a Comment