A Plateau State High Court sitting in Jos has dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by one Umar Adam, a convicted armed robber, who was recently granted state pardon but later re-arrested in connection with the murder of a fellow inmate, Auwal Mohammed.
The court ruled in favor of the Respondent, upholding the right of the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Philemon Daffi. to represent the Respondents being the Nigeria Police Force (Sued as 1st Respondent), Commissioner of Police Plateau State Command (Sued as 2nd Respondent) and DCP Adamu S. Usman (Sued as 3rd Respondent).
Umar Adam, who was serving a sentence for armed robbery, was pardoned on June 11, 2024, by the Executive Governor of Plateau State, Barr. Caleb Manasseh Mutfwang following the recommendation of the State Advisory Council on Prerogative of Mercy. However, shortly after his release, Adam was re-arrested over his alleged involvement in the killing of Auwal Mohammed, a fellow inmate, while both were still incarcerated.
The murder of Auwal Mohammed was said to have been carried on the 31st day of May, 2024 at about 2330 hours at the Jos Custodial Centre.
According to the three (3) Counts Charge of Criminal Conspiracy, Culpable Homicide and Influencing the Course of Justice, filed against the Applicant and other Defendants, which Charge was attached as Exhibit MOJ “A”.
In the Counter-Affidavit of the Honourable Attorney-General to the Originating Motion, the Applicant and Timjul Sunday Dala, Aliyu Hassan, Adamu Muhammadu conspired among themselves and did fatally beat and tie up one Auwal Mohammed, which led to his death. The Defendants allegedly issued threats to potential witnesses to murder, that is, Abdulkadir Sanusi, Rinkur Nimyel and Muhammad Adam (all cellmates of the Defendants at the Jos Custodial Centre).
On December 13, 2024, Adam’s legal team led by T. Dacha, Esq., filed a fundamental rights enforcement action against the Nigerian Police Force; Commissioner of Police Plateau State Command and DCP Adamu S. Usman, seeking declarative reliefs to include the award of N10 million to the Applicant against the Respondents being aggravated damages for what they termed as unlawful detention without Charge.
P. A. Daffi, Esq., leading a team of Counsel from the Ministry of Justice filed a Counter Affidavit to the Originating Motion on the 29th January, 2025. However, in the course of the proceedings, the Applicant lawyer filed a Motion on seeking an order of the Court to disallow Mr. P.A. Daffi, Esq., the Honourable Attorney-General of Plateau State and/or any legal officer in his Department from appearing in the Suit. According to the argument of the Applicant Counsel, the Attorney-General powers in Section 211 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) does not extend to civil suit but limited to criminal matters only, amongst other arguments.
In a Counter-Affidavit to the Motion on Notice, P.A. Daffi, Esq., argued that the police were acting on behalf of the People of Plateau State. That the Respondents actions of arresting and investigating the Applicant in view of Prosecution was on behalf of the People and Government of Plateau State and as such, they were acting as agents of the State and not as agents of the Federal Government.
More so, the Applicant and other Co-Defendants in Charge PLD/J05CR/2025 were charged under the provisions of the Plateau State Penal Code Law, 2017. The Police had forwarded the Original Case Diary to the Ministry Legal Advice and Prosecution where favourable. Processes in the extant Suit were equally forwarded from the Police to the Honourable Attorney-General for representation.
It was further argued by the Honourable Attorney-General that fundamental human rights Suits are sui generis (in the class of its own) and cannot even be said to be wholly civil, thus, guided by the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009.
In his judgment delivered on the 7th May, 2025, Justice SP Gang dismissed the objection regarding the representation of the police by the Honourable Attorney-General. As the Chief Law Officer of the State, and with the fact that the Attorney-General extant Suit was proper. The Court Suit was dismissed.
