Kidnap kingpin, Ch ukwudumeme Onwuamadike a.k.a. Evans, has for the second day, sued the Inspector General of Police, and three others before a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, claiming N300million as damages over his alleged illegal detention.
This came as Police authorities re-emphasised that they had obtained an order from a Federal High Court in Abuja to hold onto him for three months, to allow them conclude investigations into several cases of kidnapping, robberies and murder against the suspect.
Meanwhile, Evans in the new motion filed yesterday, is claiming the sum of N300 million as general and exemplary damages against the Police for alleged illegal detention and unconstitutional media trial. Respondents in his new motion are the Nigeria Police Force, Commissioner of Police Lagos State, and the Special Anti-Robbery Squad, Lagos State Police Command.
It will be recalled that Evans had on June 28, filed an ex-parte application numbered FHC/L/CS/1012/2017, before the same court, seeking an order directing the respondents to charge him to court. He had also in the alternative, sought an order directing the respondents to release him unconditionally where no charge was preferred against him. In an affidavit deposed to by his father, Mr Stephen Onwuamadike, he averred that the applicant had been subjected to media trial without any court order by the respondents.
Onwuamadike further averred that the media trial orchestrated by the respondents have continued to generate reactions in both print and electronic media without his son being afforded fair hearing before a court of law. Continued detention violates my rights — Evans Evans had contended that his continued detention by the respondents since June 10, without charges, or release on bail is an infringement on his fundamental rights.
In his new suit, also marked FHC/L/CS/1012/ 2017 and bearing similar respondents, the applicant is seeking a declaration that his continued detention since June 10 without arraignment, violates his fundamental rights as guaranteed under the 1999 constitution. He is also seeking a declaration that his parade on June 11 before journalists in Lagos, at the Lagos police command headquarters in Ikeja, without any court order, is unconstitutional and illegal.
He is consequently, seeking an order, compelling the respondents to immediately arraign him before a law court, or release him from custody forthwith. Evans is also seeking an order compelling the respondents to jointly and severally pay him the sum of N300 million as exemplary damages for illegal detention and alleged harm caused by media trial. He is also seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from further arresting, detaining, harassing, investigating or inviting him in relation to the facts of his case. He seeks further orders as the court may deem fit to make in the circumstances. No hearing date has also been fixed for his latest suit. However, reactions have continued to trail the suits, particularly the fresh one by Evans, with lawyers differing on the suit. He’s entitled to reliefs under the law — Fashanu, SAN Mr Babatunde Fashanu, SAN, in his reaction, said: “The man is entitled to the reliefs he is seeking from the court. The constitution is clear on this. He is either charged to court or released on bail. If they don’t charge him to court, one can presume that all these allegations are not true. So, let them prefer a charge against him. “If I am the judge, and you have been holding somebody for more than four weeks without a charge, it is important to grant him his liberty and let them come when they have concluded investigation.
That is the position of the law, rather than media trial.” No issue if lawyer represents Evans, says NBA chief Mr. Monday Ubani, 2nd Vice President of NBA, said “There is nothing wrong for a lawyer to represent the suspect if he is properly briefed. However, if he was not briefed and decided to jump into the case pro bono, that will be a breach of the code of legal practice ethics.
‘’If any lawyer breaches any of the professional ethics, it is punishable under our law. However, considering the decision to approach the court, the probability of such motion or case to sail through depends on the reliefs sought before the court. The court is at liberty to decide otherwise.” From Vanguard.