POLICE TAKE TAJUDEEN RIGHTS JUDGMENT TO APPEAL COURT, CHALLENGE ‘WANTED’ RULING
IGP, Lagos CP, PSC Ask Appellate Court to Set Aside High Court Decision, Cite Remand Order, Alleged Flight to Benin Republic and INTERPOL Intervention
By Headlinenews.News
A fundamental-rights judgment against the Nigeria Police Force is heading for a major appellate test, as the Inspector-General of Police, Lagos State Commissioner of Police and Police Service Commission challenge a Lagos High Court decision arising from the arrest and detention of businessman Alhaji Hameed Tajudeen.
The appeal is significant because it raises a question extending beyond the parties before the court: where does legitimate police authority to pursue a suspect in a serious criminal investigation end, and an unlawful infringement of individual liberty begin?
In a Notice of Appeal dated August 12, 2026, the appellants asked the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, to set aside the judgment delivered by Justice O. L. Alebiosu of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja Judicial Division, on August 7, 2026, in Suit No. ID/ADR/21447MFHR/2026.
The Police are challenging the whole decision.
At the centre of their case is the High Court’s finding concerning the declaration of Tajudeen as wanted and the alleged infringement of his fundamental rights.
The appellants insist their actions were not arbitrary.
According to the Notice of Appeal, the Police had obtained an order at Magistrate Court No. 3, Ogba, Ikeja, before Magistrate L.A. Owolabi in Charge No. MIK/60A/2026 on February 16, 2026, for Tajudeen’s arrest and remand for 14 days pending the conclusion of investigation.
That judicial process could become a critical issue before the Court of Appeal.
If the Police acted pursuant to valid judicial authority, the appellate court will have to determine whether the High Court gave sufficient legal weight to that fact before concluding that Tajudeen’s rights had been violated.
The Police also maintain that Tajudeen could not initially be located and that INTERPOL intervention was eventually required to secure his arrest in the Republic of Benin.
Their argument is straightforward: law-enforcement agencies confronting an alleged suspect who cannot be found in Nigeria, is alleged to have crossed an international border and is wanted in connection with a serious offence cannot reasonably be expected to abandon an investigation.
But this remains an allegation advanced by the appellants, and the Court of Appeal will ultimately determine its legal significance from the evidence and record transmitted from the lower court.
The appellants further contend that the alleged offence was both a felony and a capital offence and that, given its seriousness, a warrant was not necessarily required before an arrest could lawfully be effected.
This raises an important distinction the appellate court may have to resolve.
The legality of an arrest and the legality of publicly declaring a person wanted are related, but they are not necessarily identical legal questions.
The Court of Appeal may therefore have to determine not merely whether Police possessed powers of arrest, but whether those powers were exercised within the law throughout the investigation.
The Police have also invoked the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Alhaji Mujahid Dokubo-Asari v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2007) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1048) 320, arguing that individual rights must, in appropriate circumstances involving national security, be weighed against wider public and state interests.
That authority gives the appellants an arguable constitutional foundation, although its application to the particular facts of Tajudeen’s case will ultimately be for the Court of Appeal to determine.
The appeal should therefore not be dismissed as a routine attempt by the Police to escape an adverse judgment.
There are substantive questions requiring appellate clarification: the effect of the February 16 remand order; the extent of Police powers in investigating an alleged capital offence; the legal consequences of a suspect allegedly evading arrest and leaving the country; the significance of INTERPOL involvement; and whether a separate court order was legally required before declaring the respondent wanted.
These are issues on which clarity from the Court of Appeal could have consequences for policing and fundamental-rights litigation far beyond this particular case.
At the same time, filing an appeal does not establish that the High Court was wrong. Nor does the seriousness of an allegation extinguish constitutional protections. The Police must still demonstrate that every material action challenged was authorised by law and proportionate to legitimate law-enforcement objectives.
That is precisely why the decision to appeal is important.
The rule of law protects citizens against arbitrary state action, but it must also provide law-enforcement agencies with sufficient lawful authority to investigate grave crimes, pursue suspects and protect society. Fundamental rights should be vigorously protected; they should not become an unintended shield against legitimate criminal investigation.
The appellants are represented by Audu Augustine Enenche, SAN, alongside A. Isola-Osobu, Nneka Hellene Uba, Kenneth Akaanyor and Raymond Pila of Lawlinks Legal Practitioners, while Tajudeen is represented by Abraham Akaakaa.
No hearing date has yet been announced.
The Court of Appeal will now have the opportunity to determine whether the High Court correctly drew the boundary between constitutional liberty and legitimate Police powers.
For the Police, the appeal is therefore more than an attempt to reverse an unfavourable judgment. It is an opportunity to obtain appellate clarification on how far law-enforcement agencies may lawfully go when a suspect in an alleged serious offence is said to have evaded arrest and crossed Nigeria’s borders.
NATIONAL PATRIOTS: LET THE LAW DECIDE
The National Patriots Movement of Nigeria welcomes the decision of the Police to pursue the constitutional appellate process rather than allow disagreements over the judgment to be settled outside the courts.
Where serious criminal allegations, individual liberties and legitimate law-enforcement responsibilities intersect, the judiciary remains the proper institution to establish the boundaries.
No Nigerian should be deprived of fundamental rights arbitrarily, but no suspect should be placed beyond lawful investigation merely by invoking fundamental rights.
The National Patriots therefore urges all parties to respect the appellate process and allow the Court of Appeal to determine the issues strictly on the law and evidence.
Justice must protect the innocent, restrain abuse of power and, at the same time, give lawful policing the authority it needs to protect society.
Princess Gloria Adebajo-Fraser MFR.
Headlinenews.News Special Legal Report
