A Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia has fixed hearing for January 22, 2026, in a ₦5 million fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by an Abia-based journalist, Ms Charity Uwakwe, against the Abia State Government, the Attorney-General of Abia State, the Nigerian Police Force, the State Commissioner of Police, and a senior government official over alleged unlawful detention, physical assault, intimidation, and degrading treatment meted out to her.
The suit, filed on June 13, 2025, by Umuahia-based human rights lawyer, Mr Dennisson Emeka Agu, through an Originating Summons, invokes Sections 34(1), 35(1) and (6), 39, and 46 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Articles 4, 5 and 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, and Order II Rules 1 to 3 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009.
When the matter, currently before Justice Kehinde Ogundare, came up on December 4, 2025, Ms Uwakwe was represented by Mr Agu, while Mrs Oluchi Franklin, the Abia State Government, and the Attorney-General of the State were represented by Mr Chinedu O. Ogwo of the Abia State Ministry of Justice. The Nigeria Police Force and the Commissioner of Police were absent and were not represented in Court. The Court consequently adjourned the matter to January 22, 2026, for hearing and directed that a hearing notice be issued and served on the Commissioner of Police.
In her substantive claims, Ms Uwakwe alleges that on June 30, 2023, while lawfully carrying out investigative reporting at the Ministry of Women Affairs, she was allegedly detained for more than three hours, physically assaulted, verbally abused, and subjected to degrading treatment by Mrs Franklin, who she maintains acted under the authority of the Abia State Government. She further asserts that when she later attempted to lodge a formal complaint at the Central Police Station, officers allegedly demanded an unlawful monetary inducement before taking any action, thereby denying her access to justice.
Consequently, she seeks several declaratory and injunctive reliefs, including orders compelling the Attorney-General, the Nigeria Police Force, and the Commissioner of Police to investigate the alleged violations; a ₦5 million award in general and exemplary damages; a perpetual injunction restraining further harassment; and a public apology to be published in two national newspapers.
Responding to the suit, Mrs Franklin, the Abia State Government, and the Attorney-General of the State filed a 27-paragraph Counter-Affidavit through Mr Ogwo, describing the suit as a “gold-digging exercise” and denying all allegations of assault, intimidation, or degrading treatment. They contend that Ms Uwakwe merely caused a disturbance within the Ministry premises and was asked to leave, insisting she was never detained at any time. They further challenge the credibility of the medical report tendered, describing it as fabricated and lacking probative value, arguing also that the Court cannot compel the Attorney-General or law enforcement agencies to investigate the alleged incident.
In response, Ms Uwakwe filed a detailed Reply on Points of Law, arguing that the Respondents’ stance is legally misconceived and contrary to established principles governing fundamental rights proceedings. She contends that once credible evidence is placed before the Court, the burden shifts to the Respondents to justify their actions, something she says they have failed to do. She maintains that the State Government is vicariously liable for the conduct of Mrs Franklin, who acted within the scope and premises of her official duties. She also argues that her right of access to court under Section 46 does not require her to first file administrative complaints before seeking judicial redress.
She also argued that the Respondents’ position is fundamentally flawed and contrary to established jurisprudence. She emphasised that fundamental rights enforcement actions are sui generis and must be approached liberally without undue technicality. She maintains that once credible affidavit evidence is placed before the Court, the evidential burden shifts to the Respondents, who she says have failed to rebut her specific and uncontroverted allegations. She further insists that the timing of a medical report affects its probative value, not admissibility, and that the Court retains discretion to evaluate its weight.
Ms Uwakwe also argues that the Abia State Government is vicariously liable for the actions of Mrs Franklin, who allegedly acted within government premises and under the colour of her official authority. On the Respondents’ claim that her suit is a gold-digging venture, she states that such assertions trivialise serious constitutional infractions and do not constitute a valid legal defence.
The matter is now fixed for hearing on January 22, 2026, subject to service of the hearing notice on the Abia State Commissioner of Police.
