Dasuki Buhari
Dasuki’s Family
Dasuki Buhari
Dasuki’s Family Anxiously Awaiting his Release over
Appeal Court’s Order
In a unanimous judgement, justices of the Court of Appeal have
ordered the immediate release of the former National Security
Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd), who has been in detention
since 2015 by the President Muhammadu Buhari led-Federal
Government.
The family members and associates of the detained ex-NSA are
eagerly awaiting his release after four years in the custody of
Department od State Security Service (DSS).
Speaking to PRNigeria in confidence in Abuja, the family members
maintained that the President should consider the Appeal Court’s
‘landmark’ judgement, having flagrantly disobeyed previous courts’
rulings ordering that Dasuki be granted bail.
“We are anxiously waiting for President Buhari’s government to
obey the latest order of the Court of Appeal by releasing our
breadwinner. So far six different judges at the FCT High Courts,
Federal High Courts as well as Ecowas Court of Justice have ordered
for the immediate release of Dasuki after perfecting the bail
condition which were never obeyed. We pray that with the unanimous
judgment of a panel of the Appeal for Dasuki’s immediate release,
the government will obey the order coming from a higher court in
the land.”
Meanwhile, a group of well-wishers and sympathizers have offered
to stand as sureties for the erstwhile NSA in the latest court
judgement at the Appeal Court.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has declared the detention of
former National Security Adviser (NSA) Col. Sambo Dasuki since
December 2015 by the Department of State Security Service (DSS) as
illegal, unlawful and unconstitutional and ordered his release on
conditional bail.
The appellate court held that the DSS and its Director General
acted outside their constitutional powers on the long period of the
detention of a Nigerian citizen and imposed a fine of N5m on them
to be paid to Dasuki as compensation for breach of his fundamental
right.
In a unanimous judgment of a 3 – man panel of Justices of the
court led by Justice Tinuade Akomolafe- Wilson, the court held that
the fundamental right of the ex NSA had been brazenly and brutally
breached by the prolonged detention without trial in any fresh
charge or investigation contrary to the provisions of the 1999
constitution.
In the lead judgment of Justice Akomolafe- Wilson, Dasuki was
subsequently admitted to bail in the sum of N100m and two sureties
in the like sum.
The two sureties shall be serving public servants not below the
status of level 16 officers in either state or public service of
the Federal or any of its agencies and shall produce a valid
documents of his or her status to the registrar of the federal high
court in Abuja.
Each surety must be resident within the jurisdiction of the high
court and other physical address must be verified by the court
registrar and shall also produce two recent passport size
photographs in addition to deposing to affidavit of means.
The sureties each shall furnish evidence of ownership of
property in the Federal Capital Territory worth N100m
The appeal court ordered that the DSS and its Director General
should not detain Dasuki again and that whenever he is required on
any allegation, it must be conducted within the working days and
from 9am to 6pm for him to go home.
The court also ordered that the international passport of the ex
NSA shall remain with the Deputy Chief Register of the high court
for the time being.
A federal high court Judge Ijeoma Ojukwu had on July 2 2018,
admitted Dasuki to bail on conditions the NSA complained to be too
harsh and stringent for him his family to perfect especially
deposit of N100m to the high court registrar by his sureties before
he can be released on bail.
The appeal court Justices set aside the harsh and stringent bail
conditions of the judge for being outlandish and replaced them with
the fresh ones.
The court commended the findings of facts by the judge that
Dasuki had been dehumanized by his prolonged detention but
disagreed with her on the refusal to award damages as compensation
to assuage the injuries inflicted on the ex NSA.
“In my avowed view the learned trial judge misconceived the
prayer of the appellant and erroneously interpreted relief 4 for
bail as an alternative prayer to relief 7 for damages”.
“This error occasioned a miscarriage of Justice by the failure
to award damages which is a natural consequence for the finding
that the fundamental right of the appellant has been grossly
violated; upon which the court heavily deprecated the action of the
1st and 2ndRespondents.
“The established principle of law as amplified in plethora of
authorities is to the effect that award of damages must flow
naturally once the court find that the fundamental right of an
individual has been breached with legal justification. The
compensation is automatic, and ought to be granted, even when the
aggrieved party does not pray for compensation.
“The judiciary is the main institution charged with the
responsibility for the protection and enforcement of human rights.
The fundamental rights intentionally entrenched in our constitution
must therefore be jealously guarded and protected through practical
pronouncements of reliefs granted by the courts so as to assuage
citizens whose fundamental rights have been violated”.
“Under no guise or any circumstance whatsoever should the court
shy away from the hallowed role. It is common knowledge that a
threat to the right of one individual is a threat to the right of
all. Democracy, which we value exceedingly in this country cannot
be successful if respect for human rights and constitution is
wobbling.
“The point I am putting across is that effective judicial
protection of human rights is an indispensable component of order
and good governance so as not to weaken the confidence of the
people in seeking for judicial enforcements and remedies of their
rights.
“I am conscious of the fact that the lower court heavily
deprecated the act of the 1st and 2ndrespondents for the unlawful
continued detention of the appellant especially where three courts,
including the ECOWAS court had impugned their action of the
violation of the appellant right.
“The respondents neither cross-appealed nor filled a
respondent’s notice on this issue. The decision of the trial court
on the finding that the appellant’s fundamental rights were
unlawfully breached is therefore extant. I will therefore say no
more on this point.
“I am conscious of the fact that the issue of bail, its grant
and the fixing of terms are entirely at the discretion of the
court. Such discretion must however be exercised judicially and
judiciously. Each case must be determined on its own peculiar
circumstances.
“In the instant case, the appellant had previously been granted
bail by three different courts. The conditions for the bail have
been fulfilled and there is no incidence of breach of the
conditions granted. The law is settled that the main function of
bail is simply to ensure the presence of an accused person at his
trial.
“The most important consideration in fixing the terms for bail
therefore is whether the applicant will not escape justice. The law
is also settled that stringent and severe conditions are granted
only where there is the likelihood that the applicant might jump
bail. Generally, it is against the spirit of the constitution to
impose excessive and stringent conditions for bail, as that will be
tantamount to refusal of bail.
“In this case, the trial court made an order for the retention
of the appellant’s international passport and also found that the
likelihood of him jumping bail is “short-circuited,” where the
likelihood of the appellant jumping bail is obviated, the bail
conditions ought to have been on more liberal terms.
“In the circumstances of this case, especially having regard to
the findings of the court as analyzed in the foregoing, the
condition for the deposit of one hundred million naira by the
appellant’s surety as deposit for his bail is most unnecessary
punitive, onerous and unjustifiable. There is no conceivable reason
for such oppressive bail condition as granted by the trial
court.
The appeal court therefore ordered that Dasuki must be allowed
to go home on bail upon his perfection of the fresh bail
conditions.
The judgment was endorsed by Justice Peter Olabisi Ige and
Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim.
By PRNigeria
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..