Alleged homicide: Court admits jurisdiction, restrains action against Doguwa

Justice Mohammad Yunusa of the Federal High Court sitting in Kano, yesterday, affirmed jurisdiction to hear and grant a N500 million bail on an ex parte application concerning embattled Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, Alhassan Ado Doguwa.

Delivering judgment on a motion on notice filed by Doguwa against his detention by the lower court, Yunusa held that the Chief Magistrate Court lacks jurisdiction to preside over any charge bordering on criminal conspiracy.

He cited Section 251 (1), which exclusively granted the federal court jurisdiction to hear cases on firearm, as contained in charges filed against Doguwa.

Although the judge emphasised that granting Doguwa bail was not meant to prevent him from trial, he insisted due process must be followed.

In an affidavit submitted before the court, Doguwa, through his attorney, Nureini Jimoh (a Senior Advocate of Nigeria), sought enforcement of the fundamental rights of his client, as guaranteed by the Constitution.

The lawyer claimed that the police detained Doguwa unlawfully and against his right to liberty and freedom, as allowed under provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

As contained in the affidavit, the lawyer insisted the incarceration of his client by the Chief Magistrate was null and void, as well as unconstitutional, because a lower court lacks the competence to try criminal charges.

Dissatisfied with the order of the court setting Doguwa free, the prosecution counsel, A.B. Saleh, queried the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to exercise the orders, insisting the action of Yunusa amounted to gross abuse of court process.

In a 26-paragraph counter-affidavit, the prosecution maintained that the police possess statutory duty to investigate any related case on criminal conspiracy for any period of time. It added that such action does not constitute any infringement on the fundamental rights of a citizen.

In his judgment, Yunusa declared that citizens reserve the right, under the provisions of Section 46 (1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to approach any high court and challenge attempt or breach of their fundamental rights.

He revealed that both state and federal high courts share concurrent jurisdiction to hear matters on fundamental rights.

The justice said Doguwa ought not to be remanded in a correctional facility, in the first instance, because he was not arraigned and properly charged.

The court, therefore, granted the applicant’s prayer, restraining the police from arresting, harassing, detaining or taking further action against Doguwa.