The choice of the Federal authorities to efficiently receive an exparte order from a Federal Excessive Court docket anchored on the anti-terrorism Act towards the chief of the Revolution Now protest motion Omoyele Sowere has been described as the peak of government recklessness and abuse of energy.
Making the declaration towards the backdrop of the order by Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the Federal Excessive courtroom based mostly on the appliance towards Mr. Sowere by the Division of State Companies (DSS) beneath the supply of part 27(1) of the Terrorism (prevention) modification Act, the Rights group – HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) mentioned the motion of the federal authorities to even institute the cost towards Mr. Sowere just for planning to name for a nationwide civil protests devoid of violence whereas the identical authorities is actively dialoguing with armed bandits in Zamfara and has on many events freed arrested hardened terrorists of the Boko haram terror networks and armed flank herdsmen beneath the misleading guise of being deradicalised, amounted to a flagrant breach of the constitutional oath of workplace sworn to by president Buhari and is a violation of part 15(5) of the structure which obliges authorities to eschew abuse of energy.
HURIWA additionally acknowledged that for the reason that presiding decide has the discretionary powers of bail, he must have exercised that in favour of Mr. Sowere who is completely non-violent since even part 36(5) of the structure which is increased in standing to the anti-terrorism Act acknowledged unambiguously that: “Every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proven guilty”.
HURIWA mentioned the Decide cannot subsequently be heard saying that he cannot train his discretionary powers to grant bail to Omoyele SOWORE who as far obtainable data is worried is a peaceful agitator for good governance. Judges are granted judicial discretion to grant or refuse bail. Because of this the problem of bail is on the discretion of the Decide. That is by advantage of part 118, 119;120;123 and 125 of the felony code Act of 1016, cap 38 (1988);2NWLR (Half 78) 602 @610 and part 120 of Prison PROCEDURE Act.
HURIWA expressed disappointing shock on the granting of the extended detention of SOWORE thus: “Are we no longer living under a constitutional democracy? Why keep a citizen for more than a month when the constitution recognizes that he is innocent until proven guilty? We are shocked at the rate of institutionalization of injustice and unfairness by president Buhari who on one hand has authorized dialogues with armed bandits and terrorists who have killed over 27,000 Nigerians whereas he has instructed the Department of State Services (DSS) working under him to file charges of terrorism against a blogger and an activist Mr. Omoyele Sowore who is alleged to have expressed the determination of his platform named “Revolution Now” to stage a nation-wide civil protests to agitate for basic adjustments within the state of insecurity in Nigeria”.
“Is the judge now over-ruling the plethora of supreme court decisions which are to the considered effect that the granting of bail is within the discretion of the presiding judge?” By the best way, why ought to the courtroom or any authorities company corresponding to DSS disguise beneath some nebulous provisions of a statute to topic a citizen to the denial of his basic freedoms of motion and liberty even when the structure says he’s harmless till the courtroom determines in any other case?”
“Why arrest a citizen if you as an agency of government has yet to wrap up your investigations? Who pays for the denial of his freedoms if the investigation turns up constructively positive in the favour of the man whose civil liberty is being caged courtesy of a misapplication of the law?”
“The decision of this Federal High court will surely undermine civil liberty and the constitutional freedoms because for the government to simply pick up someone it considers as a dissident and without enough evidence to now walk leisurely into the Federal High Court after days of illegally detaining the citizen and successfully get the nod of the court to continue to embark on a voyage of discovery and search for any sort of evidence whereas the freedoms of the detainee is being infringed upon is a set back to the years of civil rule that we have witnessed.”
“If the court is no longer the hope of the common man since the oppressive government can simply and arbitrarily arrest its opponents and bring up any sort of charges and still succeed in getting the court to permit the prolonged detention of a citizen, so the government can go about seeking to procure evidence no matter how contrived then we are doomed as a nation. The judiciary must not be part of the reactionary elements that seek to destroy constitutional democracy ”.