In a landmark judgment, the High Court sitting in Kaduna State has ordered the Commissioner of Police to pay ₦15 million in damages for unlawfully obstructing political rallies organized by the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP). The ruling, delivered earlier this week, declared that the actions of the Kaduna State Police Command constituted a violation of the fundamental human rights of the affected political party members to peaceful assembly and association, as guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Details of the Judgment According to court documents, the case arose after operatives of the Kaduna State Police Command reportedly disrupted planned rallies organized by both the ADC and SDP. The political parties, through their representatives, approached the High Court to challenge the police’s interference, arguing that it was politically motivated and unconstitutional. In its verdict, the court found that the Commissioner of Police acted beyond his legal powers, infringing on the rights of the applicants. Consequently, the court awarded ₦15 million in damages to the affected parties, stating that no security agency has the authority to arbitrarily restrict lawful political gatherings without proper justification. The court emphasized that the right to peaceful assembly and political participation is one of the pillars of Nigeria’s democracy and must not be curtailed under any circumstance, except when public safety is genuinely threatened — and such must be proven with evidence. Judicial Accountability and Rule of Law This ruling serves as a strong message to security agencies across Nigeria that citizens’ fundamental rights are inviolable and that law enforcement officers can be held personally accountable for violations. It reinforces judicial oversight over the misuse of police powers during political seasons, especially when political tension is high. Legal analysts have described the judgment as a victory for democracy and an important reminder of the independence of the judiciary. It is also expected to serve as a deterrent to future instances of political suppression and unlawful restriction of civic rights. A senior legal practitioner in Kaduna commented that the decision “reaffirms that Nigeria’s democracy thrives only when every citizen and political group is allowed to express themselves freely without fear of intimidation or arbitrary interference.” Reactions and Broader Implications The judgment has drawn reactions from political observers, human rights groups, and citizens alike. While many hailed it as a progressive step toward democratic accountability, others called for continuous monitoring of police activities during political campaigns and rallies. Human rights organizations have also urged the Nigeria Police Force to use this ruling as a turning point to retrain its officers on constitutional rights and lawful engagement during public gatherings. Observers believe this case could become a legal precedent for future lawsuits involving the restriction of political or civic assemblies in Nigeria. Why This Judgment Matters The court’s ruling highlights the delicate balance between security management and civil liberty protection in Nigeria. It sends a clear signal that the right to peaceful assembly cannot be overridden by political or administrative interests. As Nigeria prepares for upcoming elections and political campaigns, this judgment reinforces the importance of upholding constitutional freedoms, respect for due process, and judicial redress when state actors overstep their boundaries. Conclusion The ₦15 million fine against the Kaduna Commissioner of Police marks a decisive win for Nigeria’s democratic values. It reaffirms that the judiciary remains the last hope of the common citizen and continues to stand as a guardian of constitutional order. By defending the rights of the ADC and SDP members, the court has once again proven that no authority is above the law — and that the freedom to assemble peacefully remains a cornerstone of Nigeria’s democracy.
Nnamdi Kanu has rejected the federal government’s request to resume his trial, emphasizing the need to respect Justice Binta Nyako’s recusal from the case. Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has turned down the Nigerian federal government’s move to resume his ongoing trial. The controversy began when Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court recused herself from handling Kanu’s case on September 24, following an oral request made by Kanu himself. Kanu had explicitly expressed his loss of confidence in her ability to handle his trial fairly, prompting the judge to step aside and forward the case file to the chief judge for reassignment. However, Chief Judge John Tsoho later returned the case to Justice Nyako, insisting that Kanu must submit a formal motion through a notice before the court would consider any judicial reassignment. On December 5, the prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, addressed a letter to the Deputy Chief Registrar, requesting the court to set a date for trial resumption. In response, Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, opposed the trial resumption request in a letter dated December 9. He maintained that the previous decision by Justice Nyako to recuse herself remained valid and binding, emphasizing that no formal court order had overturned her withdrawal from the case. Ejimakor further argued that continuing with the trial under the same judge could mislead the court and violate constitutional principles, as the judge had already stepped down from the case. READ ALSO: Follow the LMSINT MEDIA channel on WhatsApp: Join Our WhatsApp Group Hear: Chat on WhatsApp Join our Telegram Chanel.
