Renowned human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), has taken legal action against Oba Semiu Ogunjobi, the Olorile of Orile Ifo, seeking N200 million in damages over an alleged human rights violation. The lawsuit, filed at the High Court of Ogun State, Ota, aims to uphold the fundamental rights of Elder Areola Abraham Love JP and demands a public apology in The Punch, Vanguard, and Nigerian Tribune newspapers. Legal Action Against Oba Ogunjobi The lawsuit, dated March 7, 2025, accuses Oba Ogunjobi and his associates of assaulting Elder Areola, a 73-year-old man, in a widely circulated video. The footage, which sparked public outrage, shows Elder Areola kneeling beside a road while being physically attacked. Following the viral incident, the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR) sought Falana’s intervention, leading to this high-profile case. Government’s Response and Legal Implications In response to public condemnation, the Ogun State Government suspended Oba Ogunjobi for six months and later arraigned him before a Magistrate Court on charges of assault. According to the court filings, Falana argues that: Falana’s Legal Demands The lawsuit seeks the following: Potential Legal Precedent This case is expected to set a legal benchmark for human rights protection in Nigeria, emphasizing the accountability of traditional rulers. For more insights into human rights law in Nigeria, refer to Amnesty International’s report on human rights violations. READ ALSO: Follow the LMSINT MEDIA channel on WhatsApp: Join Our WhatsApp Group Hear: Chat on WhatsApp Join our Telegram Chanel.
Amnesty International (AI) has called for Boko Haram to be held accountable for the years of atrocities and war crimes it has committed against Nigerian civilians. This comes as human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), condemned the harassment and legal threats directed at Amnesty International Nigeria (AIN). Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have also urged President Bola Tinubu to take immediate action to end the alleged intimidation of the rights group. AIN’s Director, Isa Sanusi, spoke out after the brutal attack by Boko Haram on farming communities in Borno State on January 12, where over 40 civilians were killed. Sanusi condemned the massacre, highlighting Boko Haram’s utter disregard for human life and international humanitarian law. “Boko Haram must be held to account for its years of atrocities,” Sanusi said. “Our investigation found that Boko Haram gathered farmers and fishermen, separated the men, and shot them at close range. Those attempting to escape were chased down and killed, while others were injured.” The search for bodies continues, with plans for a mass burial for the victims. Sanusi emphasized that Boko Haram’s ongoing abductions and widespread looting remain a serious threat to civilians, stressing that urgent measures are needed to protect the public and ensure justice for victims. Since 2020, Boko Haram has specifically targeted farmers around Lake Chad. Meanwhile, Falana condemned the Nigerian Police Force (NPF) for intimidating Amnesty International simply for fulfilling its legitimate duties. The NPF had, through a letter on January 6, 2025, demanded a retraction and public apology regarding AI’s publication on police violence during the August 2024 #EndBadGovernance protests. The police refuted the accusations, calling them false and unsubstantiated. Falana responded, criticizing the legal threats as harassment aimed at stifling free speech and activism. Several CSOs, including the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (CJID), and 64 others, condemned the police’s actions. They called on the Nigerian government to halt the escalating crackdown on activists, human rights defenders, and journalists, and to ensure that Nigerians can freely exercise their rights without fear of retaliation. READ ALSO: Follow the LMSINT MEDIA channel on WhatsApp: Join Our WhatsApp Group Hear: Chat on WhatsApp Join our Telegram Chanel.
Kindly Share:
Nigerian human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, has openly criticized the administration led by President Bola Tinubu for permitting the Nigerian police to bring charges of treason and terrorism against peaceful protesters, some of whom are minors.These charges were filed following protests that erupted over the significant economic difficulties affecting Nigerians, which many attribute to the government’s adherence to neoliberal policies advocated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The policies have been seen as contributing to rising living costs and a decline in the standard of living.Falana, a well-known advocate for civil and human rights with decades of experience, pointed out the irony of President Tinubu’s current stance. He reminded the public that Tinubu himself was once a victim of state repression and had to flee Nigeria during the era of General Sani Abacha’s military rule to avoid a death sentence from an oppressive dictatorship. Today, under President Tinubu’s administration, we see a similar pattern of suppression. Peaceful demonstrators, including children, are being charged with treason simply for expressing their dissatisfaction with the economic hardships that have intensified due to policies influenced by the IMF and the World Bank,” Falana noted.The protests that led to these severe charges occurred in August 2024, when discontent over the surging cost of living and other economic challenges sparked demonstrations across the nation. REAF ALSO: Public Reactions: Divided Opinions and Heightened Emotions. Trump These protests highlighted the deep frustration felt by many Nigerians over economic policies that they believe have worsened their situation. The government’s response, which included arresting and charging protesters with serious offenses like treason and terrorism, has drawn widespread criticism, raising concerns about the state of civil rights and freedom of expression in the country.Falana’s remarks underline the paradox of President Tinubu’s leadership, given his past experience as a political dissident under military rule. This context sheds light on the current administration’s handling of dissent, echoing historical patterns of repression and challenging the narrative of democratic progress.
