A Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday, adjourned the N300 million fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by the Singer, Darlington Achakpo, popularly known as Speed Darlington, against the police, until March 19 for adoption of processes.
Justice Musa Liman fixed the date after counsel for the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, CSP Audu Garba, informed the court that the police had just filed a further counter affidavit in response to the singer’s further affidavit served on them in the last adjourned date.
Rosemary Hamza, who appeared for Speed Darlington, said she was yet to be served to know how to respond appropriately.
The court subsequently fixed March 19 for parties to adopt their processes.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that in the fundamental right suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1832/2024, Speed Darlington sued I-G as sole respondent.
The artiste, who urged the court to declare that his arrest and detention violated his fundamental rights as guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution, sought four orders.
In the suit filed by Deji Adeyanju, he sought an order directing the I-G to immediately and unconditionally release him from detention facility where he is being kept.
Alternatively, he sought an order mandating and compelling the I-G to produce him before the court to enable the court inquire into the circumstances constituting grounds of his arrest and detention and where it deems fit, admits him to bail.
He also sought “an order directing the respondent to pay the applicant the sum of N300,000,000.00 (Three Hundred Million Naira) only as general, exemplary and aggravating damages for their unlawful and continued detention since the 2024 till date.”
In the affidavit deposed to by Esther Eyisi, a secretary in the law firm, she alleged that Speed Darlington was first arrested on Oct. 4, 2024 for allegedly defaming Burna Boy, a popular musician.
She said he was illegally detained for five days and subjected to severe torture and maltreatment without being formally charged to a court of competent jurisdiction.
Eyisi averred that the artiste was eventually granted bail by the police after spending five days under inhumane conditions.
According to her, on Nov. 27, 2024, the applicant was arrested and detained by officers of respondent on the grounds that he allegedly jumped administrative bail.
This, she said, was in spite of notification from her client about his medical emergency and his inability to report on the scheduled date and obtaining the permission of the officers of the respondent to travel to Owerri, Imo for a performance.
She said the continuous detention of Speed Darlington without arraignment contravened his constitutional rights, describing him as the “breadwinner in his family.”
But in the police counter affidavit deposed to by SP David Atama, he averred that on Sept. 24, 2024, his office received a petition from the nominal complainant, Damini Ebunoluwa Ogulu, popularly known as Burna Boy, through his counsel G.C. Ijioma of Rockfold Chambers.
Atama said Burna Boy alleged threat to his life, intimidation, among his followers contrary to Section 24 of the Cybercrime Prohibition (Prevention) Act, 2015 (as amended).
The officer alleged that in the course of investigation, Speed Darlington was invited and he came and volunteered a written statement and admitted the commission of the offence.
But in the further affidavit, Speed Darlington said he had never admitted to committing any offence.
The singer said the allegations in the counter affidavit were false and misleading as Burna Boy “himself had confirmed the allegation which is now subject of brute joke that several personalities have been making publicly in respect of the said Burna Boy.”
He said he had never jumped bail contrary to the police submission.
Meanwhile, Speed Darlington was, on Jan. 15, admitted to a N20 million bail with one surety by Justice Ekerete Akpan of a sister count in Abuja.
Justice Akpan gave the order in a ruling on the singer’s bail application moved by his lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, after he pleaded not guilty to a two-count charge bordering on alleged cybercrime.
