Powers of the Police With Respect to Investigation of Criminal Allegations

CASE TITLE: MUSA v. COP LAGOS STATE & ORS (2024) LPELR-61941 (CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 22ND MARCH, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
LEAD JUDGMENT: JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the enforcement of fundamental rights.

FACTS:
The appeal stemmed from a judgment by the High Court of Lagos State.

The Applicant, Idris Musa, had been arrested in May 2010 in connection with the murder of Ali Mohammed Kolo but had not been charged or tried for the offense.

Although he was arraigned before a Magistrate Court, which lacked jurisdiction over murder cases, the authorities responsible for ensuring his proper arraignment before a competent Court failed to do so. Despite demands for prosecution or release, the Applicant remained in custody for years without any progress in his case. His prolonged incarceration led to symptoms of mental disorder.

In 2017, the Applicant’s legal representatives filed an action to enforce his constitutional rights. Despite the Respondents’ claims of issuing legal advice for prosecution, the Applicant’s file was missing from the Court records. The trial Court, in its judgment, deemed the prolonged detention not unconstitutional and ordered the prosecution to expedite the case. However, the order was not implemented, and the Applicant remained in custody. The trial Court dismissed the Applicant’s request to compel the Respondents to either produce him in Court or prosecute him for an alleged offense for which he had been remanded in prison custody for seven years.

Displeased with the trial Court’s decision, the Applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal, seeking redress for the violation of his fundamental rights to liberty and a fair trial.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court determined the appeal on the following issues, viz:

1. “Whether the trial Court did not breach its legal duty when it failed to consider the application for enforcement of the Appellant’s fundamental rights within a reasonable time as guaranteed by the FREP Rules.”
2. “Whether the arrest and continued detention of the Appellant on the allegation of the commission of murder without any formal trial before a Court of competent jurisdiction for over 10 years is not unconstitutional and a breach of the Appellant’s Fundamental Rights.”

DECISION/HELD:
In conclusion, the Court ordered that the Appellant be released unconditionally to any member of his family to enable them take care of him adequately.

RATIOS:

• CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT(S): Meaning and nature of fundamental rights
• CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- RIGHT TO PERSONAL LIBERTY: Position of the law on the right to personal liberty of a citizen; circumstances in which he may be deprived of same
• CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT(S): Right of any person who alleges that any of the fundamental rights is being or likely to be infringed to approach the Court to prosecute his complaint and obtain redress
• CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT(S): Instance(s) when an arrest and remand will not constitute a breach of Fundamental Rights
• CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- RIGHT TO PERSONAL LIBERTY: Statutory provision regarding right to personal liberty
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- REMAND: Power of Magistrate to remand an accused person
• JUDGMENT AND ORDER- ORDER OF COURT: Whether an order of court must be obeyed
• POLICE- POWERS OF THE POLICE: Powers of the police with respect to investigation of Criminal Allegations
• PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT (ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE) RULES: Nature of proceedings under the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol