By Chinedu Adonu

ENUGU—FOR non- prosecution of the five suspects arrested over the massacre at Ukpabi-Nimbo in April 2016, a human rights group, Civil Rights Realisation and Advancement Network, CRRAN, has sued the Attorney General of Enugu State before a Federal High Court sitting in Enugu for his refusal to arraign the suspects in a court of competent jurisdiction.

The organisation in a suit no. FHC/EN/CS/106/2016, sued the attorney-general for failing to prosecute the suspects, who had been remanded in Kuje prisons since their arrest over the massacre close to a year now.

Subsequently, the Federal High Court, Enugu, yesterday. adjourned for hearing in the suit Mohammed Zurai & 5 others Vs. Attorney General of Enugu State, Suit No. FHC/EN/CS/106/2016.

Chuka Ezike, Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, had earlier entered  appearance for the attorney-general and filed a counter affidavit on his behalf, but the DPP was absent in court for the hearing.

The court upon the application of Olu Omotayo, who is also the President of CRRAN, thereafter, struck out the name of the second respondent, the Inspector General of Police, from the suit as the first respondent in their counter affidavit stated that the detainees are no longer in Police custody but have been remanded in Kuje Prison.

The court, therefore, adjourned hearing of the matter till May 17, 2017.

It would be recalled that the suit which was filed September 15, 2016, had sought the following Orders:

A.A DECLARATION that the continued detention of the 1st to 5th Applicants at the Police Force Headquarters, Abuja, by respondents since the 25th day of May 2016, without trial, and the refusal of the 1st Respondent who was under the misconception of law that he needs

the consent of the Federal Attorney General and the Presidency to arraign them for trial before a court of competent jurisdiction constitutes a flagrant violation of the 1st to 5th applicants’ fundamental rights guaranteed under sections 34, 35 and 36(5) of the

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and Articles 5, 6 & 7, of the African Charter on Human & Peoples Rights, (Ratification and Enforcement Act) Cap. A9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and is therefore illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.

B.AN ORDER of the Honorable Court Directing the 1st Respondents to charge the 1st to 5th Applicants to Court forthwith for whatever offence they might have committed.

C.An Order of Court Releasing the 1st to 5th Applicants if the 1st Respondent is not ready to prosecute them.

The suit has the following as the applicants against the Attorney General Enugu State and Inspector General of Police:

a.MOHAMMED ZURAI

1. CIROMA MUSA

c.SALEH ADAMU

d.SULEIMAN LAUTE

e.HARUNA LAUTE   and the REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF CIVIL RIGHTS

REALISATION AND ADVANCEMENT NETWORK (CRRAN) as the 6th Applicant. Some of the important facts we stated in the Affidavit in support of

the suit are:

2.That on the 25th day of April 2016, the peaceful town of Ukpabi Nimbo in Uzo Uwani Local Government Area of Enugu State, was attacked at dawn; over 50 innocent souls were sent to early grave while almost a hundred persons were wounded and houses razed down by the attackers who set buildings on fire.

3.On the 25th May 2016, the 2nd respondent at the Police headquarters, Abuja, under the leadership of the then Inspector General of Police Solomon Arase (Rtd), paraded the 1st to 5th Applicants, as suspects in the case.

4.The 2nd respondent further maintained at the press briefing of May 25th 2016, that there were overwhelming evidence against the 1st to 5th applicants as video recording of the massacre was also found on one of them.

5.Since that 25th May 2016, which is over 3 months ago, the 1st respondent refused to call for the case file in respect of this case and commence criminal trial of the 1st to 5th applicants.

6.That the 6th Applicant wrote to the 1st Respondent to discharge his constitutional duty and arraign the 1st to 5th applicants before a court of competent jurisdiction but he refused. The copy of the said letter is attached as ‘Exhibit A’

7.The 1st respondent is the No.1, Legal officer of Enugu State and it is his constitutional duty to commence trial of the 1st to 5th Applicants.

8.The 1st respondent in reaction to our ‘Exhibit A’ has been stating erroneously that he needs the consent of the Federal government to institute the trial.

9.The position of the 1st respondent was only aimed to blackmail the Federal Government of Nigeria as the case is not a political matter or a matter that need the consent of the Federal Attorney General before action could be taken.

“This public interest litigation is very vital to peace in Enugu because if the arrested culprits are arraigned before a court of competent jurisdiction it will serve the interest of justice for th

aggrieved citizens of the state and serve as deterrent to other criminal elements,” CRRAN posited in the suit.