Godwin Tsa, Abuja
Hearing in the separate suits filed by Omoyele Sowore, the convener of the #RevolutionNow protests, and his co-defendant, Olawale Bakare, against the Department of State Services (DSS) over alleged unlawful detention has been fixed for March 25 by the Abuja division of the Federal High Court.
The adjournment came after the parties to the suits on Wednesday regularised their processes filed in relation to the suits.
While Sowore and Bakare are applicants in the suits, the DSS DG and AGF are 1st and 2nd respondents, respectively.
The plaintiffs are demanding N500 million compensation each in the suit which they listed the Director-General of the DSS and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) as respondents.
Sowore’s suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/1407/2019) was filed Nov 15, 2019, while Bakare’s matter (FHC/ABJ/CS/1428/2019) was filed Nov. 20, 2019.
Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu had, on November 6, 2019, ordered the release of the duo from DSS custody but both were rearrested after meeting the bail conditions.
Sowore was arrested in August for planning a nationwide protest he tagged ‘#RevolutionNow’.
He was charged with treasonable felony alongside Bakare.
In the suit, Sowore is seeking an order of “declaration that the detention of the applicant from November 7, 2019, till date in violation of the order for his release made on November 6, 2019, is illegal as it violates his fundamental right to liberty guaranteed by Section 35 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Article 6 of African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement Act (CAP A10) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.
“An order of this court compelling the respondents to pay to the applicant the sum of N500,000, 000, 00 ( Five hundred million naira) as general and aggravated damages for the illegal violation of the applicant’s fundamental right to life, dignity of his person, fair hearing, health, freedom of movement and freedom of association.
“An order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from further violating the applicant’s fundamental rights in any manner whatsoever and however without lawful justification.”