Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
September 4, 2019 9:41 am
"My reason, being that a cursory look at the provision of Section 18 Police Act, shows that it bothers on the "Appointment of supernumerary police officers for the protection of property" owned or controlled by any person interested. The section 18 of the Act provides thus:
(1) Any person (including any government department) who desires to avail himself of the services of one or more police officers for the protection of property owned or controlled by him may make application therefore to the Inspector-General, stating the nature and situation of the property in question and giving such other particulars as the Inspector-General may require.
(2) On an application under the foregoing subsection the Inspector-General may, with the approval of the President direct the appropriate authority to appoint as supernumerary police officers in the Force such number of persons as the Inspector-General thinks requisite for the protection of the property to which the application relates.
(3) Every supernumerary police officer appointed under this
Section—
(a) shall be appointed in respect of the area of the police province or, where there is no police province, the police district or police division in which the property which he is to protect is situated;
(b) shall be employed exclusively on duties connected with the protection of that property;
(c) shall, in the police area in respect of which he is appointed and in any police area adjacent thereto, but not elsewhere, have the powers, privileges and immunities of a police officer; and
(d) subject to the restrictions impose by paragraphs (b) and (c) of this subsection and to the provisions of section 22 of this Act, shall be a member of the Force for all purposes and shall accordingly be subject to the provisions of this Act and in particular the provisions thereof relating to discipline.
(4) Where any supernumerary police officer is appointed under this section, the person availing himself of the services of that officer shall pay to the Accountant –General
(a) on the enlistment of the officer, the full cost of the officer’s uniform; and
(b) quarterly in advance, a sum equal to the aggregate of the amount of the officer’s pay for the quarter in question and such additional amounts as the Inspector-General may direct to be paid in respect of the maintenance of the officer during that quarter.
and any sum payable to the Accountant-General under this subsection which is not duly paid may be recovered in a summary manner before a magistrate on the complaint of any superior police officer.
Provided that this subsection shall not apply in the case of an appointment made on the application of a department of the Government of the Federation. (Underline is mine for emphasis)
(5) Where the person availing himself of the services of any supernumerary police officer appointed under this section desires the services of that officer to be discontinued, he must give not less than two months’ notice in writing to that effect, in the case of an officer appointed in respect of a police area within that part of Lagos State formerly known as the Federal territory, to the inspector-General or, in the case of an officer appointed in respect of a police area within a State; and on the expiration of such notice the services of the supernumerary police officer in question shall be withdrawn. (Underlined for emphasis)
The wordings of the provisions of the said section 18 of the Police Act, in my respectful opinion, seem clear and unambiguous and it is meant to be an "appointment to protect property" of any interested person. The wording should be given its plain and ordinary meaning. See: Nnoye V Anyichie & Ors (2005) 2 NWLR (Pt 910) 623 and PDP V INEC (2014) 17 NWLR (Pt 1437) 525."
PER G.O.KOLAWOLE, J.C.A IN FIDELITY BANK PLC V JAMES OLANREWAJU & ORS
Appeal no: CA/L/976/2015
Appeal no: CA/L/976/2015
LEGALPEDIA ELECTRONIC CITATION: LER[2019]CA/L/976/2015
