A Federal High Court sitting in Kano has declared the culpable homicide, criminal conspiracy charges against House of Representatives majority leader, Alhassan Ado Doguwa, as unconstitutional.
The trial judge, Justice Mohammad Yunusa, in his judgement on the motion on notice filed by Doguwa against his fundamental rights and unlawful detention by the lower court, held that Chief Magistrate Court lacked the jurisdiction to preside over any charge bordering on criminal conspiracy.
Yunusa cited section 251 (1) which exclusively granted the Federal High Court jurisdiction to hear cases on firearms as contained in the charges filed against Doguwa.
Although the judge emphasized that granting Doguwa bail was not meant to prevent him from trial, he insisted that due process must be followed.
In an affidavit submitted before the court, Doguwa through his attorney, Nureini Jimoh, SAN, sought for the enforcement of fundamental rights of his client as guaranteed by the constitution and other lawful Charter.
The senior lawyer claimed that Doguwa was detained by the police unlawfully and against his right to liberty and freedom as allowed under several provisions of the 1999 constitution as amended.
As contained in the affidavits, the applicant lawyer had insisted the incarceration of his client by the Chief Magistrate was null and void and unconstitutional because lower court lacked the competence to trial criminal charges.
Dissatisfied with the order of the court setting Doguwa free, the prosecution counsel A.B. Saleh queried the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to exercise the orders, insisting that the action of Justice Yunusa amounted to gross abuse of the court process.
The prosecution, in his 26 paragraphs counter-affidavits, maintained that police possess statutory duty to investigate any related case of criminal conspiracy for any period of time adding that such action does not constitute any infringement to the fundamental rights of the citizen.
In his Judgement, Justice Yunusa declared that citizens reserved the right under the provisions of section 46 (1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended to approach any high court to challenge an attempt or breach of his or her fundamental right.
We’ve got the edge. Get real-time reports, breaking scoops, and exclusive angles delivered straight to your phone. Don’t settle for stale news. Join LEADERSHIP NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates →
Join Our WhatsApp Channel
