Nnamdi Kanu’s Lawyer, Ejiofor drags Police to court over house invasion

• Seeks N2bn compensation

Ifeanyi Ejiofor, counsel to the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has dragged the Nigerian Police Force (NPF) before the Federal High Court, Abuja over alleged invasion of his house and killing of four occupants by the Police.

Ejiofor, in the suit filed on his behalf by Maxwell Okpara, wants an order of the court, compelling the Police to pay him the sum of N2 billion as compensation and damages for the burning of his house and shooting of his aged mother by the Police at his Oraifite hometown in Anambra State on December 2, 2019.

Joined as defendants in the suit marked, FHC/ABJ/CS/135/19 is the Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police, Area Commander, Divisional Police (DPO) in Anambra State, the Nigerian Army, Chief of Army Staff, Federal Republic of Nigeria and Attorney General of the Federation.

The Plaintiff is also asking the court to restrain the respondents, their agents and privies from further harassing, intimidating, threatening his life and destroying his house and other properties.

He further applied for an order of the court stopping the respondents from threatening him with arrest and torture and to compel them to retract the public notice made on December 3, which declared him wanted and to also tender an apology to him in five major newspapers and any other form of reparation.

ALSO READ: Bloodbath as muslim communities fight over praying ground

In a -37 paragraph affidavit in support of his fundamental rights enforcement suit, the plaintiff claimed that he was in his Oraifite hometown in Anambra State between November 25 and December 1, for the burial of his late brother, Reverend Louis Ejiofor.

He said further that on December 2, his house was still filled with relatives, friends and well-wishers, helping him to evacuate tents, chairs and other materials used for the burial ceremony when a group of 16 policemen allegedly invaded his house.

In the affidavit deposed to by his immediate elder brother, Evangelist Emeka Ejiofor on his behalf, the plaintiff averred that the police claimed to be looking for suspects involved in an alleged communal clash and that he spoke on phone with the Area Commander promising that he would make himself available on the same day by 11 am.

He further averred that by 10.15 am, the same police squad led by the Area Commander, came ahead of the appointed time and violently invaded his ancestral home with sporadic shooting at every living object.

In the confusion that ensued, the plaintiff said that four young men were instantly shot dead while his aged mother sustained gunshot injury from the trigger, happy officers.

Ejiofor stated that the dead bodies were evacuated from his house to a market place and burnt there.

ALSO READ: EFCC attacks Andrew Yakubu’s suit, challenges court’s jurisdiction

The plaintiff further averred that on December 3, the Commissioner of Police, Anambra State caused a public notice through television stations and other news media that he had been declared wanted without been given adequate time and opportunity to respond to any allegation against him if any.

He, therefore, urged the court to declare the invasion of his house and subsequent shootings and killing of unarmed civilians as barbaric, wicked, illegal, oppressive and a gross violation of his rights to life, dignity of human person, personal liberty, fair hearing and right to private and family life as guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution.

Ejiofor further sought court’s declaration that the setting ablaze of all buildings and properties in his Oraifite ancestral home in Ekwusigo Local Government of Anambra State by the police as illegal, barbaric, oppressive, unlawful and amounted to a gross violation of his rights to property as guaranteed by the constitution.

He also wants the court to declare that the December 3 public notice by the police declaring him as a wanted person without giving him the opportunity to respond to any allegation against him if any, is illegal, unconstitutional, unreasonable, null and void as the action violates his right to fair hearing as guaranteed by law.

Meanwhile, no date has yet been fixed the hearing of the suit.

You might also like
Comments

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. AcceptRead More