Police involvement in civil matters: Clarity at last?

THE dream: The Nigerian Police. Effective. Well resourced. Held in high esteem by all. Trusted by all.The  reality: The Nigerian Police. Under resourced, under paid and pilloried by all. Distrusted by all. Yet, for all their faults, they remain a most important and vital pillar of our civilisation and society sustaining order in the midst of the centuries old and eternal fight between good against evil. We all know there is a wide gulf between the dream and the reality. There are many reasons for this gap. Many of these reasons are rooted in our history, our politics and our culture and are too complex to be simplified here. One of these myriad of reasons, however, is the very widely perceived and long held ingrained beliefs throughout the rank and file of our society throughout history that if you suspect that a crime is being committed, about to be committed or has been committed, you have to,  by law, bring a complaint to The Police who have the power to investigate these complaints. There were no provisions requiring that your suspicions has to be reasonable or limited to criminal matters before you can avail yourself of the help of the police.

Unfortunately, the definition of a crime and offence are seen by society and the police as one and the same. The police and the citizen have been the ones who determine if a conduct amounts to a crime or offence and they also determine what needs to be done. Are these long held beliefs right? No, says the Supreme Court in the recent Supreme Court case of Kure v C.O.P. (2020) 9 NWLR (Pt.1729) 296. The case itself before the Supreme Court concerned a contractual dispute regarding breach of a contractual duty to supply exotic animals.  The appellant being the supplier had failed to keep to the terms of their contract and the defendant got the Police involved and secured the conviction of appellant, in the Magistrate Court in Kaduna and this conviction was upheld on appeal by the High Court and the Court of Appeal until the Supreme Court quashed it and awarded costs against the defendants.

In elucidating the duties of the Police as enshrined in the Police Act? The Supreme Court said thus: “The primary duty of the police by section 4 of the Police Act is the prevention of crime, investigation and detection of crime and the prosecution of offenders. See Ibiyeye v. Gold (2012) All FWLR (Pt. 659) 1074. The police is not a debt recovery agency and has no business to dabble into contractual disputes between parties arising from purely civil transactions. See McLaren v. Jennings (2003) FWLR (Pt. 154) 528; (2003) 3 NWLR (Pt. 808) 470. When, as in the circumstances of this action, a purely civil matter is reported to the police, such a person cannot go scot-free as the report ought not to have been made at all since it is not within the purview of police duties. It is a report made mala fide and he will be equally liable for the action taken by the Police irrespective of whether he actively instigated them or not, since he had no business involving the Police in a purely civil matter in the first place. Such conduct which portrays disregard of the law and is aimed at using the coercive powers of the State to punish a contracting party in purely civil matters ought to be mulcted in exemplary damages. See Okafor & Anor v. AIG Police Zone II Onikan & Ors (2019) LPELR-46505.

“Mrs. Sokari Davies being an enlightened person knows that reporting such a matter to the Police, instead of going to court to seek enforcement of the said contract or damages for breach of same, wickedness and mala fide. The charges for cheating and criminal breach of trust cannot have a place against the appellant, let alone proving it to a conviction. The appellant is hereby discharged and acquitted. He in fact deserves an unreserved apology from Mrs. Sokari Davies who set unjustly and mala fide the criminal stone rolling against the appellant.” This decision of The Supreme Court has provided much needed clarity for hitherto going by the wide provisions in this Act, the practice of The Police in their forays into civil matters has hitherto, been interpreted both  by The Police and the general Nigerian society who have availed themselves of their services as civil matters can be criminal matters and can be resolved by the Police intervention and they justify Police interventions as being reasonable and justifiable in the context of their early involvement would prevent a much worse outcome for our society in terms of preservation of law and order. Further, they justify them also on the basis of quick resolutions whereas court takes so long and in many cases brings a lot of bottlenecks.

They chose the quicker version and the police are happy to assist.  But with this judgement, a sweeping change has now been effected. No longer are the Police to get involved in purely civil matters. This decision has brought great clarity and has freed the police from the distractions of our society’s penchant for using them for private civil matters and will now enable them to focus on the key elements of their duties. Primarily on law enforcement and preservation of life and property in our nascent democracy. Welcome as it is, this Supreme Court decision unfortunately has failed to clarify at what point does the Police Act or not act on laying of a complaint by an aggrieved citizen when the said complaint may be capable of being a civil matter and a criminal matter. It also failed to clarify or suggest what mechanisms should be available to the police to use in calibrating if a complaint reported to it by a citizen is a purely civil matter. Further, it failed to address the fact that this is not just a police problem, it is a society’s problem. Endemic and deep rooted.

In the instant case, one wonders that even though the police were adjudged to have acted wrongly however, on the facts of the case, did not the Appellant, in fact, fail to perform their obligations under a freely entered into contract? Could not the Supreme Court seize this opportunity and in the due exercise of its discretion, give a judgement against the Appellant since it is proven that the Appellant did not supply the said animals and had withdrawn part of the payment in a way not agreed by the parties? This failure, by the Supreme Court will inevitably lead to further and costly litigation by the parties and in this Covid-19 landscape, this represents a missed opportunity to reduce the workload of the courts by dealing with the entirety of the matters between the parties. One wonders that from a moral viewpoint, was the police action wrong? Further, did not the magistrate court agree with the police?

Did not the High Court and Court of Appeal court not agree with the High Court, which agreed with the magistrate court, which agreed with the police?

Notwithstanding the above, it may appears that the Supreme Court may be holding the Respondent to a higher standard suggesting that the determination of the blame lay on the Respondent who The Supreme Court said was an “enlightened person”.

Would the outcome be different if the complainant was un-enlightened?

This judgement raises some questions. What about banks, government bodies, commissions parastatals, quangos and the such like where these  bodies investigates civil matters and then raise criminal prosecutions on purely civil matters.

Are they any different from the Police getting involved in debt matters?

That said, it is worth remembering that the key provision is the section 8 (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 states that “a suspect shall not be arrested merely on a civil wrong or breach of contract.”

This above provision therefore should be the watchword for all policemen and women so that when a complaint is brought before them that appears on the surface to be entirely about a civil wrong or breach of contract, the Police should cease and desist from getting involved and not arrest them but instead direct the complainant to issue court proceedings through a lawyer.

However, for this change to work, we need our Police to be adequately resourced and well paid so the motivation to engage in these sort of activities would be non existent.

Secondly, as our Police men and women are not trained lawyers, we need to offer more training to our Police force targeting the knowledge gap in identifying what is a crime or civil action before arresting them.

Thirdly, our society needs a re-education and public information drive to educate our people on what a crime is and what a civil action is and what to do if they have either.

Further, our courts are to take the lead in robustly scrutinising every report and charge sheet brought before them especially at the magistrate court level to sift cases that are manifestly civil matters and deal with them robustly to discourage anyone seeking to use the Police in such a way.

In addition, Counsels should be advised via information drive by the NBA to be alert to these types of matters very early on in their clients matters and raise the matter immediately it becomes apparent that such is the case.

Furthermore, The Police would be well advised to consider having more Government appointed lawyers within each police station who would be the final adviser as to charges, arrests and how they are to proceed.

They should also consider the retraining and sanction, where appropriate, Police officers who engage themselves in debt recovery operations and who are arresting people in furtherance of their involvement in debt recovery, for if they don’t, it would not be very long before Litigants will be joining the Police as defendants in matters where the Police has been involved in debt recovery or other civil matters and arrested them.

This will lead to a high likelihood of Courts issuing punitive damages and costs against Police Officers found to have been involved in debt recovery, or other civil matters, which will tarnish the image of The Nigerian Police.

If all the above are implemented and seen through to the end, we will get closer to The dream – The Nigerian Police. Effective. Well resourced. Held in high esteem by all. Trusted by all.

• Christopher is a Senior Member of the Enugu Bar.

YOU SHOULD NOT MISS THESE HEADLINES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE

More Shocks As Unemployment Data Exposes Misery Status Of Nigerians
BEFORE now, economic and finance experts found it difficult to assess the healthy nature of the labour market and how to measure the impact of government policies targeted at creating jobs because of lack of real time labour data. But on Friday, August 14, 2020, the concerns were only slightly eased as the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) published second quarter (Q2):2020 labour statistics, the first report since Q3:2018…

MONDAY LINES: Obasanjo’s (D)Art Of Condolence
Ben Guriano of The Washington Post described them in 2018 as ‘taboo enforcers.’ These are trolls seeking to upend truth and subvert facts about the life and times of the dead. ‘Do not speak ill of the dead’ came originally from a Spartan philosopher, then it was latinated by the Romans to read De mortuis nihil nisi bonum – and got spread around the world like Chinese viruses. The black man, as in all cases, contracted the no-no and turned it into a religion, got drunk with it and won’t mind killing for it…

2.4 Million Households To Benefit From FG’s Stimulus Package — Presidential Aide
TO ensure food security for citizens, at least 2.4 million households will benefit from the Federal Government’s post-COVID-19 stimulus package, a presidential aide says. Dr Andrew Kwasari, Senior Special Assistant (SSA), to the President on Agriculture, disclosed this in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Sunday in Abuja. Kwasari spoke against the backdrop of projects anchored by the Nigerian Economic Sustainability Committee (NESC) to secure the economy against the effects of COVID-19…

SERAP Demands Withdrawal Of Broadcasting Code Seeking To Sanction Contents ‘Insulting’ Leader
THE Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sent an open letter to President Muhammadu Buhari, urging him to “urgently instruct the Minister of Information and Culture, Mr Lai Mohammed, and the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) to withdraw the apparently illegal broadcasting code and memo threatening to sanction any broadcast that denigrates, disrespects or insults the president, governors…