The Nigerian Air Force (NAF) has been urged to investigate allegations that its personnel assaulted court officials and prevented them from enforcing a judgment in a property dispute in Jabi, Abuja.

In a complaint dated September 28, 2026, lawyers to Professor Abubakar Hassan alleged that armed Air Force personnel confronted officials of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and forced them to leave a property at No. 111, Plot 287, Ebitu Ukiwe Street, Jabi District, during an enforcement exercise on September 25.

The lawyers, Musa Yakubu (SAN) & Co., reportedly identified the personnel as being led by a Squadron Leader and asked the Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Sunday Kelvin Aneke to intervene in the matter.

The complaint was acknowledged at the Headquarters of the Nigerian Air Force on September 29.

Yakubu noted that the incident followed a September 15 ruling by the District Court of the FCT sitting in Jabi, which dismissed an application by Kryterion Limited to stay execution of an earlier judgment granting Hassan possession of the property.

The dispute arose from a tenancy agreement between Hassan and the company, whose managing director is a retired Colonel.

The case, registered as Suit No. CV/JIW/383/2025, concerned the recovery of possession of the Jabi property following the expiration of a tenancy agreement.

According to court documents, the agreement commenced on August 1, 2015, and expired on July 31, 2025.

The legal practitioner noted that Hassan approached the court to recover possession, arguing that the tenancy had expired and that the company’s continued occupation of the premises was unlawful.

After hearing the case, the District Court delivered judgment in his favour on June 9, 2026.

The court declared that the tenancy had expired and ordered the company to vacate and hand over possession of the property to the claimant.

Kryterion subsequently challenged the judgment and applied for a stay of execution pending the determination of its appeal.

According to him, on September 15, 2026, the District Court dismissed the company’s application to suspend enforcement of the judgment.

According to the ruling, the company failed to establish the special or exceptional circumstances required to justify a stay of execution.

Ten days later, Hassan’s lawyers alleged, court officials arrived at the property to enforce the judgment but were prevented from completing the exercise by armed Air Force personnel.

In their September 28 complaint to the Chief of Air Staff, the lawyers alleged that the personnel assaulted the court officials and chased them away from the premises.

They further noted that the personnel remained at the property after the incident, preventing their client from taking possession in accordance with the judgment.

The lawyers sought the Air Force leadership’s intervention and the withdrawal of the personnel from the property.

The legal practitioner said Section 287 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, provides for the enforcement of decisions of courts established under the Constitution and applicable laws.

“If armed personnel can prevent court officials from carrying out their lawful duties, it risks sending a dangerous message that court orders can be ignored whenever a party has the backing or access of a powerful institution.

“That would weaken public confidence in the judiciary and raise concerns about unequal access to justice, particularly where ordinary citizens depend on the courts to protect their property and enforce their rights”, Yakubu said.