The Federal High Court, Abuja, on Thursday, admitted Vijah Opuama, the Bayelsa Governorship Candidate in the November 16, 2019 election to a bail in the sum of N100, 000.
Justice Taiwo Taiwo, in a ruling, described the police action to have held Opuama for over 20 days without charging him before a court as “an affront on the democracy.”
Justice Taiwo also ordered that the respondents in the case must conclude whatever investigation they claimed to be carrying out against the applicant within 14 days.
Opuama’s Lawyer, Michael Odey, had, on August 31, brought an ex-parte application before the court, asking the police to show cause why the detainee should not be released unconditionally, following his arrest on August 15.
Justice Taiwo, had, on August 31 and September 2, ordered that Opuama, who was said to be in police custody, be produced in court but the orders were disregarded by the security outfit.
While the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, Mr Adamu Mohammed, is the 1st respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Police in-charge-of the I-G’s Monitoring Unit is the 2nd respondent in the suit.
The judge had also, on Monday, issued the third order, directing that the detainee be produced in court on Wednesday, September 9.
He held that the I-G and his subordinate joined as the 2nd respondent in the suit risked being personally summoned should they fail to comply with the fresh order.
Counsel to the police, Ms C. O. Amalaha, who held a brief for Wisdom Madaki, however, produced Opuama at the Wednesday’s sitting.
Amalaha had informed that Opuama was produced from Suleja Prison where an Upper Area Court at Zuba, Abuja, ordered him to be remanded after police filed charges of resistance of arrest against him at the court on September 4.
Delivering his ruling, Justice Taiwo expressed surprise that the respondents refused to accept the applicant’s motion for bail order of the court for his production and the hearing notices from the court bailiff on September 2 on the premise that time was not enough for them to produce the applicant in court.
“However, they had time to rush the applicant to the Upper Area Court on September 3 to secure his being remanded in a prison custody”.
He said in his earlier order, the applicant was neither produced in court nor was the respondents represented in court.
The judge noted that on September 7 when Opuoma was also ordered to be brought to court, the respondents, without complying with the order, sent Amalaha to court only to notify that they had filed applications to show cause why the applicant should not be released.
Taiwo held that the court must ensure that its order was obeyed in all cases.
According to him, in a democratic setting where the rule of law is entrenched in the system, it will be working in an anti-clockwise direction and an affront and indeed, an onslaught on the democracy if a person or body of persons, however highly placed, shall decide to brush aside, downgrade and ridicule the court order.
He said the court was always jealous of its decision and would not allow anyone to ridicule it.
“The court of law is a toothless bulldog; it can bark, bite, break and make as circumstances warrant”.
According to him, obeying court order is not just a legal but a moral obligation.
He held law is settled that every order of the competent court of law must be obeyed and not for any party to choose which to obey.
The judge said that was why he refused to hear the matter until the applicant was produced.
He said it was even worrisome that the prayers of the respondents in their counter-affidavit were at variance with the application.
“I am at a loss with what the respondents are up to. They cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time”.Adding that, the respondents were neither here nor there.
The judge, who said the information that Opuama was charged before the Upper Area Court and it subsequently ordered his remand till October 22 from the scenario, showed that no due process was followed.
“The question is therefore whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the circumstances of this case”.
According to him, there is no formal charge of the applicant before the Upper Area Court and there is no remand warrant issued by the Upper Area Court before me from the exhibits provided.
“The law is right that he who asserts must prove”.
On the allegation of defarmation of character levied against Opuama, he wondered if the Upper Area Court had power to try criminal matters.
“No. You cannot put something on nothing” he said, adding that the police only got the applicant remanded in order to legalise their action before him.
Taiwo said an accused must be presumed innocent until proven guilty and that, it was at the discretion of the court whether or not to grant bail.
In the ruling, Justice Taiwo then admitted Opuama to a bail in the sum of N100,000 and ordered him to provide a surety in like sum, who must depose to an affidavit of means and must be resident in Abuja.
He held that “the surety, who must be gainfully employed, must give an undertaking to produce the applicant before the Upper Area Court on the date he is to appear, notwithstanding any step the applicant counsel intends to take. I further order that pending the perfection of his bail conditions, the applicant is hereby released to his counsel who shall ensure the completion of the conditions of the bail within 14 days from today”.
According to him, in view of the indication from the police that they are yet to conclude investigation, the court will give them the benefit of doubt.
“However, the applicant shall not be detained with respect to the fact of this case whenever he appears at the police station. The applicant shall be accompanied by his counsel to the police station twice a week and within the hours of 12pm and 3pm on each day for the purpose of the completion of the investigation. It means that, the applicant shall not be unduly delayed. The respondent shall conclude the investigation within 14 days and come to a conclusion whether or not they charge the applicant before a competent court to answer to the charges”.
Opuama, the Liberation Movement’s governorship candidate in the Bayelsa November 16, 2019 election, was arrested by the policemen from the IGP’s Monitoring Unit at the premises of the state’s Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal in Abuja on August 15 while waiting for judgment to be delivered on his petition challenging the outcome of the disputed poll.
