In a landmark judgment delivered in Lagos, the Federal High Court has ruled in favour of human rights activist and former presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, declaring that his being branded “wanted” by the police in November 2025 was unconstitutional and unlawful.
Justice M. Kakaki, in a judgment that lasted nearly one hour and thirty minutes, held that the actions of the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, CP Moshood Jimoh, and the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, violated constitutional provisions protecting citizens’ rights to free expression and lawful movement.
The suit, filed by Sowore, challenged his declaration as wanted on November 3, 2025, as well as an earlier warning allegedly issued on October 27, 2025, advising him to stay away from Lagos State. The court found both actions to be arbitrary, unconstitutional, and beyond the statutory powers of the police.
Justice Kakaki ruled that the police lack the authority to declare any citizen wanted without a valid court-issued warrant, declaration of wanted status must be backed by lawful process, proper notice, and evidence that the individual is evading service or investigation, the October 27 pronouncement warning Sowore to stay away from Lagos was unconstitutional and ultra vires, the November 3 declaration branding him wanted amounted to a grave abuse of power.
The court further held that declaring a citizen wanted outside the bounds of judicial authorization constitutes oppression rather than lawful policing. It emphasized that no Nigerian can be criminalized for speaking out, protesting, or holding government accountable.
In its judgment, the court awarded ₦30 million in damages against the Commissioner of Police, Lagos State, and the Inspector-General of Police, holding them accountable for the unlawful actions.
While the monetary award is significant, legal observers note that the broader implication of the ruling lies in its jurisprudential weight. The court traced the historical evolution of police powers concerning “wanted” declarations and reaffirmed that only a court of law can authorize such measures under due process.
Reacting to the judgment, Sowore’s counsel, Tope Temokun, described the ruling as a constitutional victory not just for his client but for all Nigerians who insist on their fundamental rights.
He stated that the decision sends a clear message that citizenship does not equate to obedience to unlawful authority and that questioning those in power is not a crime under Nigerian law.
The judgment is widely seen as a reaffirmation of constitutional governance, underscoring the principle that state power must always bow to the rule of law.
As Nigeria continues to grapple with debates over civil liberties and policing powers, the ruling stands as a strong judicial reminder that freedom of expression and lawful dissent remain protected rights under the Constitution.
