Ahmed Hamadada v. Nigerian Army & Ors (2024)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ONYEKACHI AJA OTISI, JCA (Delivering the leading judgment)

This appeal was lodged against the judgment of the Federal High Court sitting at Kaduna (the lower court), Coram Judice Mallong Peter Hoommuk, J delivered on November 14, 2019, wherein the claims of the appellant, as claimant before the lower court, were dismissed.

The facts leading to this appeal may be summarized in this manner. The appellant alleged that he was unlawfully arrested on 8/12/2017 and released on 14/12/2017 by the 1st – 3rd respondents. He was re-arrested on 29/1/2018 by the 1st – 3rd respondents, but subsequently transferred on 31/1/2018 to the 4th – 7th respondents on an allegation of murder.

On the application of the police, the Chief Magistrate Court, on 2/2/2018, ordered his remand in custody of the correctional facility, for two weeks to enable investigation into the allegation of criminal conspiracy and culpable homicide.

The appellant applied for and was granted bail at the Kaduna State High Court, on 6/2/2018, but remained in detention in the custody of the 4th – 7th respondents, till he was released. The appellant, alleging that his arrests and detention were unlawful, filed an application for the breach of his fundamental rights at the lower court.

The position of the respondents was that the appellant was arrested by men of the 1st respondent for the alleged murder of one Lawal Maiduna, and handed over to the 5th respondent for investigation and possible prosecution. Upon investigation, the appellant was charged to court for criminal conspiracy and culpable homicide. The 4th – 7th respondents deposed that the appellant was released on bail by the High Court, Kaduna Judicial Division, and was not thereafter rearrested by them. The matter was still pending before the High Court when the appellant filed the application to enforce his fundamental rights.

The lower court heard arguments on the application and dismissed the appellant’s claims. Dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, the appellant filed a notice of appeal on 2/10/2019 on six grounds of appeal, pages 377 – 382 of the record of appeal.

The parties filed briefs of argument, pursuant to the rules of court. The appellant’s brief was filed on 22/7/2022, but deemed properly filed and served on 10/1/2023. The 1st – 3rd respondents’ brief was filed on 22/3/2023, while the 4th – 7th respondents’ brief was filed on 22/6/2023 but deemed properly filed and served on 22/1/2024. The 8th and 9th respondents’ brief was filed on 26/6/2023, but deemed properly filed and served on 22/1/2024.

The appellant’s reply brief to the 1st – 3rd respondents’ brief was filed on 10/5/2023, and reply brief to the 8th – 9th respondents’ brief was filed on 25/7/2023. Both reply briefs were deemed properly filed and served on 22/1/2024. At the hearing of the appeal on 8/10/2024, the briefs were, respectively, adopted by Kimi Livingstone Appah, Esq. for the appellant, Emmanuel I. Okani, Esq. for the 1st – 3rd respondents, B. E. Gwadah, Esq. for the 4th – 7th respondents and by S. S. Idris, Esq., Senior State Counsel, Ministry of Justice Kaduna State, for the 8th and 9th respondents.

The appellant distilled three issues for determination thusly:

i. Whether or not the appellant placed material facts to show that he was arrested and detained by the respondents from the 8th day of December 2017 to the 14th day of December 2017, the 29th day of January 2018 to the 31st day of January 2018 and 31st day of January 2018 to the 9th day of February 2018 and the said arrest and detention is not and does not amount to a breach of the appellant’s Fundamental Right. (This issue is culled from grounds 1, 2 and 3 of the notice of appeal contained in pages 377 to 388 of the records of proceedings)

ii. Whether or not the appellant’s suit before the lower court is an abuse? (This issue is culled from ground four of the notice of appeal contained in pages 377 to 383 of the records of proceedings).

iii. Whether the learned trial Judge has the constitutional duties to evaluate the documents (evidence) presented by the appellant before arriving at a conclusion and the failure of the learned trial court Judge in evaluating the exhibits presented before the court does not amount to denial of fair hearing and the judgment of the lower court, being liable to be set aside by this honourable court? (This issue is culled from ground 5 and 6 of the notice of appeal contained in pages 377 to 383 of the records of proceedings)

For the 1st – 3rd respondents, the two issues for determination were: