Connect with us

News

Judge Dismisses Suit Against Wike, AEPB, Labels Prostitutes as Vagabonds

Published

on

Spread the love

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday, dismissed a suit seeking to stop the Minister of FCT, Nyesom Wike, and the Abuja Environmental Protection Board (AEPB) from arresting and prosecuting Commercial Sex Workers (CSWs) in Abuja.

Justice James Omotosho, in a judgement, held that the application of the plaintiff was incompetent under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009.

Justice Omotosho held that even if it was competent, “the reliefs sought are not grantable and thus, it is hereby dismissed for lack of merit.”

The plaintiff, under the auspices of the Incorporated Trustee of Lawyers Alert Initiative for Protecting the Rights of Children, Women and the Indigent, had instituted the suit.

The group sued the AEPB, FCT Minister, Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 1st to 4th respondents respectively.

The originating summons was brought pursuant to Order 3, Rule 6 and 9 of the FHC (Civil Procedure Rules, 2019; Sections 6(6)(b), 41(1), and 42 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.

In the suit dated and filed on May 14, 2024, by a team of lawyers led by Rommy Mom, Bamidele Jacobs and Victor Eboh, the group sought two questions.

The lawyers prayed the court to determine whether the duties of the AEPB under Section 6 of the AEPB Act, 1997, extends to the harassment, arrest, detention and prosecution of women suspected of engaging in sex work on the streets of Abuja.

They sought a declaration that the charge made by the personnel of the AEPB before the FCT Mobile Court, which referred to arrested women suspected of engaging in sex work as ‘articles’ and considered their bodies as ‘goods for purchase,’ is discriminatory and violated the provisions of Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution.

The lawyers, therefore, prayed the court for an order restraining the AEPB, its agents or privies, from harassing, arresting and raiding women suspected of engaging in sex work on the streets of Abuja.

They sought an order restraining the 1st respondent (AEPB), her agents or privies from prosecuting women suspected of engaging in sex work on the streets of Abuja under Section 35(1) (d) of the AEPB Act, 1997.

They equally sought an order directing all the respondents to ensure proper application of the provisions of Abuja Environmental Protect Act, 1997, by the 1st respondent.

But in a counter affidavit jointly filed by the minister, AEPB and FCTA by their lawyer, Betty Umegbulem, the respondents prayed the court to dismiss the case.

They denied all the averments in the applicant’s affidavit

Ahmed Gidado, a Legal Assistant, who deposed to the counter affidavit, said the applicant did not file any case against the 1st to 3rd respondents in 2019 as alleged in a previous judgment exhibited in the suit.

Gidado argued that the exhibit attached therein was for a case filed by one Ms Mirabel Ojimba and not the applicant.

According to him, this honourable court cannot rely on a judgment which is not signed by the presiding judge and duly certified.

He said the applicant did not present any evidence to prove that any woman was harassed or arrested by the AEPB.

He argued that the applicant did not state how its fundamental human rights were violated and which of the rights was violated by the 1st to 3rd respondents to warrant filing of the action.

The officer averred that the applicant was not the person whose fundamental human rights were allegedly violated by the 1st to 3rd respondents.

“The person (s) alleged to have been harassed, arrested or raided by the 1st to 3rd respondents are not before the court to narrate their side of the story,” he added.

Gidado said the applicant did not specifically mention the rights (as outlined in Chapter IV of the Constitution) violated by the 1st to 3rd respondents to enable the respondents to reply to the issues appropriately.

Gidado, who argued that the applicant’s prayers were not in line with the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, said fundamental human right cannot be enforced by another person who is not the victim of violation.

Also, the AGF, in his counter affidavit deposed to by Barnabas Onoja, a Litigation Officer, argued that all the facts, as presented by the applicant, were untrue and misleading.

Onoja said contrary to the applicant’s submission, the AGF never received any pre-action notice from the applicant and that his office was only aware of the present suit upon the receipt of the processes.

He said the AGF does not act as a supervisory officer over the activities of every security or federal government agency.

Delivering the judgment, Justice Omotosho formulated three issues for determination.

These included “whether the applicant can bring an action to enforce the rights of a group of persons, whether this fundamental rights suit is within the jurisdiction of this court in view of the claim of the applicant and whether the reliefs sought can be granted in the circumstances.”

The judge said the applicant, a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), which brought the suit to enforce the rights of women engaging in sex work on the streets of Abuja, cannot be stopped from bringing the action as it was well within the law to do so.

“Consequently, issue one is resolved in favour of the applicant,” he ruled.

The judge said though the right to freedom from discrimination was claimed as the first relief, “the facts and circumstances before this court show that it is simply ancillary to the main claim as regards the provision of the Abuja Environmental Protection Act, 1997.

“The import of this is that the suit cannot be competently taken under the fundamental rights enforcement procedure.

“Consequently, this issue is resolved against the applicant.”

Citing Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the judge examined what constituted enforceable human rights in Nigeria.

He said the court was not unaware that prostitution had been legalised in some western nations, including in the Netherlands where prostitutes are now entitled to pensions and other benefits.

“This is not so in Africa. The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights which is one of the Statutes enforced by the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, is clear on what fundamental rights are in Africa.”

He said looking at the preamble to the charter, the culture of Africans must reflect in their idea of what constitutes human rights.

“This philosophy is what is known as cultural relativism in the framework of human rights.

“The counterpoint to this is universality which posits that human rights should be the same in all places and should apply to persons irrespective of their culture, religion, race, gender or other differences.

“The idea behind universalism is to ensure uniformity in human rights development. Universality of human rights directly led to the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is the first global human rights document.

“While it is theoretically sound, universalism if applied would offend the unique cultures of some people.

“For instance, the right to same sex marriage which is acceptable in Western nations like the United Kingdom will be deeply unacceptable to conservative and religious nations like Arab nations.

“Thus cultural relativism means that these nations can choose which of these rights to adopt or not.

“This explains why some conservative nations exercise their right to reservation regarding several sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which are in conflict with their cultural beliefs.”

The judge said Nigeria is an African nation with deeply cultural norms that guide everyday conduct.

“I daresay that prostitution is and has never been part of our culture.

“Prostitution or ‘Olosho’ and ‘Ashewo’ as the Yorubas call it, ‘Akwuna-Akwuna’ as the Igbos call it, ‘Karuwa’ as the Hausas call it or ‘Hookup’ as the young people say it, is alien to our culture.

“It has been frowned upon as a deeply immoral act worthy of shame.

“The fact that civilisation and westernisation has taken some root in Nigeria still does not make it right.

“Even in some Western countries, prostitution is still seen as an immoral act.

“In the United States of America for instance, apart from a few counties in the state of Nevada, prostitution or sex work is illegal in the other 50 states of the US.

“There is absolutely no justification for prostitution in Nigeria in the context of our cultural norms and tradition and in fact prostitution is an anathema in Africa,” he said.

Justice Omotosho held that the prostitutes which the group sought to protect “are vagabonds” and the AEPB is well within its right to arrest and prosecute them as they constitute nuisance in the FCT and are clearly committing an offence by parading themselves as “women of easy virtue.”

“I therefore hold that this application filed by the applicant has no basis and the rights claimed are unenforceable in light of the provisions of Section 45 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and the Preamble to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights.

“| must also say here that this court is bemused by this instant application filed by the applicant which is apparently a Civil Society Organisation set up to protect the rights of girls and women.

“This court wonders what kind of message the applicant is sending when it decided to bring an action to protect prostitutes.

“A reasonable person would have expected that the applicant would instead occupy itself with developing the girl child and protecting the sanctity of womanhood instead of promoting immorality and the spread of sexual diseases.

“It is indeed shameful that the applicant should file an action such as this,” the judge held

Justice Omotosho also further held that the judgment of a sister court in suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/971/2019, exhibited by the group was only of slight persuasive authority.

The judge said he was not bound by the decision of the brother judge being court of coordinate jurisdiction, citing a Court of Appeal’s previous case to back his decision.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

NDLEA warns public against fake auction offers using officials’ names

Published

on

Spread the love

The National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) has warned Nigerians to be wary of fraudsters impersonating its officials to defraud unsuspecting members of the public through fake auction offers for forfeited vehicles.

 

In a statement issued on Friday, the agency’s spokesman, Femi Babafemi, said the scammers have been using the names of senior NDLEA officials, particularly the Secretary to the Agency, Barrister Shadrach Haruna, to circulate fraudulent letters and messages offering cheap forfeited vehicles for sale.

 

Babafemi described the offers as a deliberate scam aimed at swindling people of their money.

“The public is hereby notified that these offers are a complete scam. The Agency wishes to categorically state that these fraudulent offers are a malicious gimmick designed solely to defraud targeted individuals of their hard-earned money,” he said.

 

The agency stressed that no NDLEA official is authorised to privately allocate, sell or offer forfeited vehicles or any other seized assets to individuals.

According to the statement, all forfeited vehicles and assets are disposed of only through public auction processes conducted by government-approved auctioneers in line with legal and public procurement guidelines.

Babafemi added that legitimate auction exercises are always widely advertised in national newspapers and through the agency’s official communication channels.

He urged members of the public to disregard and report any letters, text messages or social media posts claiming to offer forfeited vehicles through Barrister Haruna or any other NDLEA official.

“The NDLEA remains committed to maintaining transparency and integrity in all its operations. Do not fall victim to these criminal elements. If you are approached with such fraudulent offers, please report immediately to the nearest NDLEA command or through our official communication channels,” the statement added.

Continue Reading

News

Initiators Promise Big As NIGMA Gets August 2026 Date

Published

on

Spread the love

 

The organisers of this year’s Nigeria International Gospel Music Awards ( NIGMA) have announced that the upcoming edition will celebrate the very best of the gospel music industry in an atmosphere of excellence, creativity, and inspiration.

 

The event is scheduled to take place on Sunday, August 9, 2026, at the prestigious Agip Recital Hall, MUSON Centre, Onikan, Lagos.

Speaking at a media briefing in Lagos, Kingsley Omoefe, Founder and Team Lead of NIGMA and Chief Responsibility Officer of Golden Heritage Limited, said the August event is designed to bring together gospel music ministers, industry stakeholders, fans, and supporters for a memorable celebration of talent, faith, and excellence.

He stated that attendees should expect an unforgettable experience featuring outstanding performances from leading gospel artists, alongside special recognitions for individuals and organisations that have made significant contributions to the industry.

The organisers also revealed that the event will feature meaningful conversations designed to inspire participants, promote collaboration, and foster the continued growth of gospel music.

The organisers said the August gathering would create memorable moments that would leave guests inspired, enriched, and motivated long after the curtains close.

They further called on corporate organisations, media outfits, and well-meaning individuals to take advantage of the opportunities available to support the event through sponsorships and strategic partnerships.

The organisers encouraged interested organisations and individuals seeking sponsorship, partnership, media accreditation, or participation to contact the event management for further information and registration ahead of the highly anticipated August programme.

Continue Reading

International News

Nottingham Forest Sacks 5th Manager In 10 Months, To Wrap Up Oliver Glasner’s Deal

Published

on

Spread the love

 

Oliver Glasner is in advanced talks to replace Vitor Pereira as Nottingham Forest head coach, a move which would see the Austrian become the club’s fifth manager in less than a year.

 

Pereira announced his departure from the club in a statement on Wednesday, saying that it came as a “complete surprise to me and without any warning”.

Glasner is a free agent after leaving Crystal Palace — where he won the FA Cup in 2024-25 and then the Community Shield and Conference League the following campaign — and is set to stay in the Premier League.

The 51-year-old confirmed in January that he would leave Palace at the end of the season after two years in charge.

On Thursday, Forest confirmed Pereira’s coaching staff Filipe Almeida, Luis Miguel, Bruno Moura, Marco Knoop and Pedro Lopes had all left the club alongside the head coach.

Pereira, 57, was appointed Forest head coach in February on an 18-month contract which runs until 2027.

The Athletic reported in May Forest had been planning to show their faith in Pereira by handing the head coach a new long-term contract, but those talks were subsequently put on hold.

“Today marks the end of my journey as head coach of Nottingham Forest,” he said in his statement.

“I want to say a sincere thank you to everyone connected with this incredible football club. Although this decision came as a complete surprise to me and without any warning, I fully respect the club’s right to make the decisions it believes are best for its future.

“Naturally, I am disappointed and saddened. I truly believed in what we were building together, and I leave with a sense of pride in everything we achieved over the past months.

“Together, we enjoyed a memorable end to the season. We secured the club’s Premier League status, reached the semi-finals of the Europa League, and created moments that will stay with me forever. Most importantly, I saw a group of players grow in confidence, belief and togetherness.

“I leave Nottingham Forest with no bitterness or resentment—only respect, gratitude and wonderful memories. Football is full of unexpected moments, and while this chapter has ended sooner than I expected, I will always look back on my time here with pride and affection.”

The Portuguese succeeded Sean Dyche and was Forest’s fourth permanent boss of the season following the departures of Nuno Espirito Santo and Ange Postecoglou.

Nuno had led Forest to Europa League qualification the previous season but he departed in September, less than three months after signing a new deal. Postecoglou was appointed his replacement but was dismissed just 39 days later. Dyche took charge of the team in October before his dismissal in February.

Forest were three points above the relegation zone when Pereira was appointed and he subsequently steered his side to Premier League safety with two games of the campaign remaining.

His appointment marked his second managerial spell in the Premier League after guiding Wolverhampton Wanderers to safety during the 2024-25 campaign.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 TheColumn NG