BREACH OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT: Whether it is enough for a plaintiff to merely state that an act is illegal and unconstitutional

"It is settled law that it is not enough for a plaintiff to merely state that an act is illegal

and unconstitutional. He must show how his civil rights and obligations have been

breached or threatened. In an application for the enforcement of Fundamental Human

Rights, particularly where arrest is alleged, the Applicant must prove specific detention

and duration. It is not a matter for speculation.

The absence of such specific deposition by the Respondents show that thelower court engaged in speculation and filled the gap in the evidence that was not before it. See. GUSAU v. UMEZURIKE (2012) All FWLR (Pt. 655) 291 @ 318.

The law is that, a party who seeks a court order must do all in its power to establish that it deserves such an order. See NACHPN v. MHWUN (2010) 2 NSCR 101 @ 138" Per NDUKWE-ANYANWU,

J.C.A. (P. 22, paras. A-F) -

Arrest properly made cannot constitute a breach of Fundamental Rights. A citizen who

is arrested by the Police in the legitimate exercise of their duty and on grounds of

reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence cannot sue the police in court for breach of his Fundamental Rights. Okawo Vs. C.O.P and Anor (2001) 1 CHR 407 CA.

Every citizen has a duty to report a suspected criminal offence to the Police for investigation and

apprehension. See Afribank (Nig) PLC v. Onyima (2004) 2 NWLR (Pt. 858) page 654.

In the present case, the Respondents have not been able to show through their affidavits that the

Appellants had done anything more than report to the police that the Respondents were threatening

the peace of the community.

What ever the police does to maintain the peace of a community is generally within their scope of duty. See Milad Lagos State v. Ojukwu (supra).

CHIEF SUNDAY EFFIONG UDO & ORS v. CHIEF SUNDAY KOFEE ESSIEN & ORS

CITATION: (2014) LPELR-22684(CA)