Justice E.O. Odebala of the High Court of Justice, Delta State of Nigeria, sitting in the Ozoro Judicial Division, has awarded the sum of N310 million against the Nigeria Police Force and eight other respondents for the unlawful arrest and detention of a lawyer, Barr. Itedjere Jude.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/NBBSPIDEL.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
The judgment, delivered on Wednesday, January 28, 2026, in Suit No. HCZ/M/43/2025, awarded N300 million as compensation for the unlawful arrest and detention, and N10 million as cost of litigation in favour of the applicant against the respondents.
The applicant is Itedjere Jude, a legal practitioner and member of the Nigerian Bar Association, Oleh Branch.
The nine respondents are DSP Justina Asiwe (Nigeria Police Force, Kwale), ASP Amedu Bright (Nigeria Police Force, Kwale), ASP Anthony Ejieh (Nigeria Police Force, Kwale), Inspector Godstime Mbuk (Nigeria Police Force, Kwale), CSP John Ehisuoria Agaga (Divisional Police Officer, Kwale), the Commissioner of Police Delta State Police Command, the Inspector General of Police, the Nigeria Police Force, and the Police Service Commission.
By way of Originating Motion dated and filed on November 28, 2025, brought pursuant to Sections 33(1), 34, 35, 37, 40, 41, 46 (1 & 2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), Article 6 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap A9 Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 2004, the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009, and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court, the applicant sought the following orders:
A declaration that the arrest and detention of the applicant by the 1st to 5th Respondents, officers and men of the Delta State Police Command acting on the authority of the 6th to 9th Respondents to detain the applicant at Kwale Police Station on September 29, 2025, to September 30, 2025, at the prompting and instigation of the 1st Respondent without any justification amounts to an infraction of the liberty and freedom of movement of the applicant and same is wrongful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and of no moment whatsoever.
A declaration that the applicant did not commit any offence to warrant the respondents to arrest and detain the applicant or take any step that is inconsistent with the fundamental rights of the applicant guaranteed and protected under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), and as such the prompting and instigation of the 1st Respondent for the arrest and detention of the applicant by the 2nd to 5th Respondents acting on the police authority of the 6th to 9th Respondents is an infraction of the applicant’s fundamental rights and same is wrongful, ultra vires, and of no effect whatsoever.
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents by themselves, police officers, security agencies, their privies, servants, and/or agents from inviting, harassing, chasing, disturbing, intimidating, or threatening to arrest and/or causing the detention of the applicant or taking such steps that are inconsistent with the fundamental rights of the applicant as protected and guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) over the subject matter of the suit forthwith.
An order awarding the sum of N500,000,000 (Five Hundred Million Naira) as compensation against the respondents for the unlawful arrest and detention of the applicant and the inconveniences of the suit.
The sum of N20,000,000 (Twenty Million Naira) being cost of litigation against the respondents.
The application was supported with a 24-paragraph affidavit deposed to by the applicant. Attached to the affidavit were three annexures marked as Exhibit A — a copy of the Charge in Suit No. MK/110C/2025: Commissioner of Police v. Barr. Itedjere Jude; Exhibit A1 — a copy of the protest or petition written by the Human Rights Committee of the Nigeria Bar Association, Oleh Branch, to the Commissioner of Police against the 5th Respondent, wherein the applicant is one of the signatories; and Exhibit A2 — a copy of the extra-judicial statement of the applicant respectively.
Despite the service of the originating processes with the hearing dates on the respondents, none of the respondents filed a counter affidavit to the application.
Justice Odebala noted that the respondents were not represented by counsel at the hearing of the application on January 12, 2026. J.O. Aikpokpo Martins Esq., learned counsel for the applicant, adopted his written address in compliance with the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009 and urged the court to grant the reliefs sought by the applicant jointly and severally against the respondents.
The court distilled a sole issue for determination: “Whether from the affidavit evidence, the Applicant is entitled to the aforementioned reliefs as stated against the Respondents?”
Justice Odebala emphasized the special nature of fundamental rights enforcement suits, citing the case of Ezeanacho v. Igwe (2020) 7 NWLR (Part 1724) page 43 @ 452 para H per Augie J.S.C., which held that fundamental right matters are placed on a higher pedestal than ordinary civil matters.
The court also cited the case of Johnson v. Udonsek & Ors (2017) LPELR-43647 (CA), where Adah JCA held: “The extant rules of enforcement, it is remarkably set out in the preamble, the overriding objectives. The court is mandated by the Fundamental rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 to constantly and conscientiously seek to give effect to the overriding objectives of these Rules at every stage of human rights action.”
Justice Odebala stated that none of the respondents filed a counter affidavit to the instant application, and therefore the court presumes that they have accepted the facts presented by the applicant in his affidavit, and the court has a bounden duty to act on those facts.
The court cited Order VIII Rule 3 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009, which provides: “Where the respondent elects, not to file a counter affidavit to the main application, the court shall presume that the respondent has accepted the facts as presented by the applicant.”
The court further cited Ezeanah v. Attach (2004) 17 WRN page 1: “The law is trite that facts in an affidavit which are not challenged or controverted by the opposing party are deemed admitted unless such facts will lead to absurdity if accepted by the court.”
The court found that in the instant case, the respondents harassed, arrested, and detained the applicant from September 29, 2025, to September 30, 2025, and also intimidated the applicant, which act is wrongful, unconstitutional, and contravenes the applicant’s right to personal liberty, freedom of movement, and dignity of human person in respect of right to personal liberty and right to property as guaranteed and protected under Sections 35(1), 41, and 43 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).
Justice Odebala cited the case of Director SSS v. Ibrahim (2016) LPELR-41618 (CA), where the appellate court held: “While the Constitution provides for arrest on reasonable suspicion, such suspicion does not, I hold, amount to detention in anticipation of an arrest. See Ekanem v. Assistant Inspector General of Police Zone (2008) 5 NWLR, (Pt 1079) page 97 @ 111, para D Per Omoge JCA.”
The court also cited Isenalumeh v. Amadin & Ors (2001) 1 CHR, 458 @ 568, where the court held: “The arrest and detention of the Applicant for three hours on the 29th of February, 2000 is a violation of his right to personal liberty.”
Justice Odebala cited Ahuruonye v. Ikonne (2015) ALL FWLR (Pt 811) pg 1233 @ 1294 para F-G, which held: “By the provisions of Section 35 (6) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, in cases involving an infraction of the fundamental rights of a citizen, such damages that will serve as a deterrent against naked, arrogant, arbitrary and oppressive abuse of power ought to be awarded by the court… A court can award damages for the infringement of a citizen’s fundamental right even where it is not expressly claimed.”
Similarly, in Groner & Anor v. EFCC & Anor (2014) LPELR-24466 (CA) at pg 28-29 para D-A, the court held: “The court of Judge is empowered to make order that may be considered just or appropriate once it is proved that a fundamental right has been violated in relation to any person. The appellants herein have sought reliefs for general, exemplary and aggravated damages. It is trite law that the Court is empowered to make any Order that may be considered just or appropriate once it is proved that a fundamental right has been violated in relation to any person. See FRN V. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Part 842) 113.”
The court held that damages in form of compensation naturally follow every act of violation of the fundamental rights of an applicant.
In the final analysis, Justice Odebala made the following orders:
It is hereby declared that the arrest and detention of the applicant by the 1st to 5th Respondents, officers and men of the Delta State Police Command acting on the authority of the 6th to 9th Respondents to detain the applicant at Kwale Police Station on September 29, 2025, to September 30, 2025, at the prompting and instigation of the 1st Respondent without any justification amounts to an infraction of the liberty and freedom of movement of the applicant and same is wrongful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and of no moment whatsoever.
It is hereby declared that the applicant did not commit any offence to warrant the respondents to arrest and detain the applicant or take any step that is inconsistent with the fundamental rights of the applicant guaranteed and protected under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), and as such the prompting and instigation of the 1st Respondent for the arrest and detention of the applicant by the 2nd to 5th Respondents acting on the police authority of the 6th to 9th Respondents is an infraction of the applicant’s fundamental rights and same is wrongful, ultra vires, and of no effect whatsoever.
An Order of perpetual injunction is hereby made restraining the respondents by themselves, police officers, security agencies, their privies, servants, and/or agents from inviting, harassing, chasing, disturbing, intimidating, or threatening to arrest and/or causing the detention of the applicant or taking such steps that are inconsistent with the fundamental rights of the applicant as protected and guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) over the subject matter of this suit forthwith.
The court awarded the sum of N300,000,000.0 (Three Hundred Million Naira) as compensation against the respondents for the unlawful arrest and detention of the applicant.
The court also awarded the sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) being cost of litigation in favour of the applicant against the respondents.
[pdf-embedder url=”https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Bar.-Jude-ItedjereNBA-Oleh-Judgment.pdf” title=”Bar. Jude ItedjereNBA Oleh Judgment”]
J.O. Aikpokpo Esq. appeared for the applicant. The respondents were unrepresented.
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
