The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Monday ordered the Inspector General of Police, Mohammed Adamu, and the Nigeria Police Force, to release a Facebook user, Mbarak Bala, who was arrested in Kaduna on February 28, 2020 for alleged blasphemous posts against Islam.
His lawyer stated in the suit that the applicant was arrested on the basis of a petition written by some Kano-based persons based in Kano, alleging ‘that the applicant insulted the Prophet of Islam Mohammed (PBUH)’.
Read Also: Ex-Gov Asks Court To Free Him Or Reduce His 10-Yr Jail Term
The court delivering judgment in the fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Bala, Justice Inyang Ekwo declared that his arrest and detention by the IGP and the NPF in an unknown detention centre since February 28, 2020 ‘because he expressed his option about religion on Facebook, constitutes an infraction of the applicant’s rights to personal liberty, fair hearing, freedom of thought, freedom of express and freedom of movement’.
The judge also declared that the action of the respondents (the IGP and the NPF) ‘in denying the applicant access to his lawyers constitutes a gross infringement of the applicant’s right to legal rep of his choice under section 34 and 35(2) of the 1999 Constitution’.
He, therefore, made an order ‘directing the respondents to release the applicant from detention to his lawyers on bail forthwith’.
He also made an award of ‘general/exemplary damages against the first and second respondents in the sum of ₦250,000 for the infraction of the fundamental rights of the applicant’.
The applicant, Mbarak Bala had sued the IGP, the NPF, and the Attorney-General of the Federation in his fundamental rights enforcement suit, alleging that the respondents violated his fundamental human rights.
Justice Ekwo further observed in his judgment that the IGP and the NPF never showed up in the case despite being served with the processes in the suit filed by the applicant and the hearing notices with regard to the case.
But the judge discontinued the case against the AGF on the basis that the matter disclosed no cause of action against the AGF.
While making the explanation, the judge ruled that the affidavit evidence put forward by the applicant not being challenged or controverted by the respondents was deemed admitted and could be relied on by the court.
AFRICA DAILY NEWS, NEW YORK
