Abuja Court Awards N400m Compensation to Wrongfully Convicted Officer

Abuja Court Awards N416m Compensation to Officer Wrongfully Convicted by Nigerian Army

“Whatever angle their conducts are viewed from, they acted clearly outside their powers.”

A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Nigerian Army and First City Monument Bank (FCMB) to pay N416 million in damages to Major Akeem Oseni for wrongful conviction and violation of his rights.

Justice Gladys Olotu of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Nigerian Army and First City Monument Bank (FCMB) to pay Major Akeem Oseni a whopping N416 million in damages. This landmark ruling was delivered on Monday, October 28, in response to Oseni's lawsuit, which alleged wrongful conviction, blocked access to his funds, and other infringements.

The case, filed on September 22, 2021, with suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1104/2021, sought various remedies, including a declaration that the freezing of Oseni's bank account was unlawful. The Nigerian Army had ordered the account freeze without a valid court order or proper chance for defense.

Oseni's ordeal began when he was instructed to “drill” a fellow soldier, Lance Corporal Benjamin Collins, who later died during the incident. Oseni was subsequently put on military trial and sentenced to 10 years in prison. His lawsuit against the Nigerian Army and FCMB is a bid to clear his name and seek justice for the alleged wrongdoing.

Major Akeem Oseni also challenged the alleged mistreatment he suffered while in custody, as well as the prolonged denial of access to his funds, asserting that these actions constituted egregious violations of his constitutional rights.

Oseni argued that the respondents' actions contravened multiple provisions of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended), including sections 35, 36, 37, 41, 43, and 44. Additionally, he claimed that the respondents breached provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR).

The statement read, “The applicant sought 13 reliefs which include: A declaration that the act of the second respondent (FCMB) placing the personal account of the applicant domiciled at First City Monument Bank, with account number 2656152XXX on post-no-debit from February 2020, till date on the directives of the first respondent which is the Nigerian Army, without a valid court order, nor affording the applicant adequate time and facility to be heard, is illegal, wrongful, unlawful and constitutes a blatant violation of the applicant's fundamental rights to a fair hearing, the presumption of innocence, rights to own moveable and immovable property anywhere in Nigeria as enshrined in sections 36 (1), 36 (5), 43 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as altered; sections 1 (1) and (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, and articles 2, 3 (2), 4 and 7 (2) of the African charter on human and peoples' rights (Ratification and Enforcement) ACT Cap A9 laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

In her landmark ruling, Justice Gladys Olotu held that the evidence presented in court unequivocally showed that the respondents acted in an arbitrary and ultra vires manner in their dealings with Major Akeem Oseni.

Justice Olotu specifically found that the first respondent (the Nigerian Army) had overreached its authority by directing the second respondent (First City Monument Bank) to freeze Oseni's account without a valid court order.

 

Justice Olotu said, “Ironically, the applicant's finance was not implicated in the investigation of the case of manslaughter against him.

“And the second respondent knowing better, either for fear of the first respondent or for reasons best known to it obeyed the first respondent's instructions and froze the applicant's account.

“Whatever angle their conducts are viewed from, they acted clearly outside their powers.”

Adding that, “They probably thought that they were above the law.

“But the principle of exemplary damages will now tell them and show them that they are not above the law and that the law is no respect for anyone who breaks it.

“It was a big stick which it used and will now use to correct the abusive and excessive respondents. tendencies of the

“The first respondent also acted more than its powers in dehumanising the applicant.

“The applicant claimed the sum of N2billion award, of general and exemplary damages, I award N100m as general damages and N300m as exemplary damages against the respondents jointly and severally in favour of the applicant.”