Court Orders DSS To Release Detained APC Data Officers

Court Orders DSS To Release Detained APC Data Officers

Justice Mohammed Yunusa of the Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday ordered the immediate release of five employees of the data office of the All Progressives Congress (APC) arrested by the security agency on November.

Justice Yunusa, while ruling on a preliminary motion filed on behalf of the five employees held that it was against the provision of Section 35 of the Constitution to continue to hold the applicants in detention while the DSS was conducting its investigations.

The five officers - Chinedu Atuche, Fayemi Olaposi,  Augustine Onuchukwu, Ebun Ilori and Esther Enemy - were arrested by the DSS during a raid on the premises of the APC data office in the Ikeja area of Lagos.

Following the arrest the APC had filed a fundamental rights enforcement suit on behalf of the five officers seeking their release, as the arrest, according to the party, violated the 1999 Constitution.

Joined as respondents in the suit are the Police and the DSS.

But according to the DSS the raid was carried out following intelligence information that some unwholesome activities were being perpetrated within the said building.

Justice Yunusa had earlier ordered the DSS to produce the five employees in court last week friday and to come and explain why the employees are still being held in custody beyond the constitutional allowed period.

But the DSS failed to produce the five detainees in court last week Friday claiming that that the agency is not aware of the court's order.

At the resumed hearing of the matter on Friday, the court declared the continued detention of the officers by the DSS as unlawful and unjustifiable.

According to the judge a citizen could not be detained for more than 48 hours before being charged to court, adding that if there was any need to extend that period, the law enforcement agency shall be required to file an application for a review of the period before a court of law.

He held, "The arrest and detention of a person for the purpose of obtaining information is clearly a violation of Section 35 of the Constitution.

"It is clear that there is a contravention of Section 35 and the applicants were not properly brought before a competent court of jurisdiction.

"The remand order, whether valid or invalid, has exceeded the time limit permitted as reasonable by the Section 35 of the Constitution.

"The same arrest and detention of the applicant is illegal and they are hereby released,"the judge stated"

The court, therefore ordered the applicants' immediate release in addition to an order restraining the DSS from further arresting them pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

The judge also ordered the applicants not to travel outside the country without informing the court.

Justice Yunusa then adjourned the case till January 19, 2015 to hear the substantive suit.

Earlier counsel to the DSS C.I. Osagie, had prayed the court to discountenance the applicants' fundamental rights application seeking their release.

Osagie had told the court that contrary to their argument that they were  being unlawfully detained, the DSS had already secured a remand order on them from "a competent law court".

The lawyer further submitted  that releasing the applicants would jeopardise investigations being carried out by the DSS, in view of the nature of allegations against them and bearing in mind that some of them were at large.

He said, "My Lord, we ackonwledge the constitutional rights of the applicants to liberty as enshrined in Section 35, however that provision is not absolute, especially with the court having been notified that there is suspicion of criminality.

"There is a remand warrant, for the remand of the applicants to the custody of the 2nd respondent over allegations bordering on forgery, electoral offences and the likes. What is before this court is that the applicants are in proper custody of the 2nd respondent pending the conclusion of investigations of the allegations."

However, the counsel to the applicants, Prof. Yemi   Osinbajo, insisted that it was against the spirit of Section 35 of the Constitution to detain any citizen for the purpose of investigation.

According to Osinbajo the 48 hours prescribed by the Constitution to detain a citizen before charging them to court had elapsed in the case of the applicants.

The senior lawyer also challenged the jurisdictional validity of the remand order, said to have been obtained from an un-named magistrate court in Kaduna.

Qestioning the remand order, Osinbajo had said, "Even this document purport to be a warrant or remand order, aside the fact that we do not know the court which granted it, it bears the signature of the DSS and it is dated November 24, whereas the applicants were remanded on November 22, which means the applicants were unlawfully detained on November 22 and 23."

He had therefore prayed the court to order their release in respect of their constitutional right to personal liberby as guaranteed by Section 35.