Nigeria’s top policing authorities have formally moved to overturn the ₦30 million damages awarded to Omoyele Sowore by the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, escalating what is fast becoming a defining constitutional contest over protest rights, police powers and public order.
The Nigeria Police Force, the Inspector-General of Police and the Lagos State Police Command have filed a notice of appeal against the February 20, 2026 judgment which held that Sowore’s declaration as “wanted” in October 2025 violated his fundamental rights.
Through Senior Advocates of Nigeria, Shuaib Mustapher and Audu Augustine Enenche, the appellants are asking the appellate court to set aside the ruling in its entirety, arguing that the trial court erred in law and occasioned a miscarriage of justice.
Ground One: Freedom of Movement Is Not Absolute.
At the core of the appeal is Section 41 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which guarantees freedom of movement. The police argue that the right, while fundamental, is not absolute and may be lawfully restricted in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, or public health.
They contend that the advisory urging Sowore to stay away from Lagos was not a blanket ban but a limited measure tied specifically to a planned protest on October 27, 2025. According to the appellants, intelligence and operational assessments indicated that the protest had the potential to disrupt highways and public infrastructure.
Lagos, Nigeria’s economic nerve-centre, carries daily commuter volumes running into millions.
Law enforcement agencies argue that preventive policing—particularly in high-density corridors such as the Third Mainland Bridge—is a constitutional duty, not an abuse of power.
Ground Two: “Wanted” Declaration and Right to Dignity.
The appeal also challenges the lower court’s conclusion that declaring Sowore “wanted” on November 3, 2025 violated Section 34 of the Constitution, which protects the dignity of the human person.
The police maintain that the declaration was connected to protests of October 27 and November 3, 2025, which they say resulted in breakdown of order and obstruction of public access. They argue that the trial court failed to properly consider the broader public consequences of the protests and ought to have taken judicial notice of widely reported disruptions.
The appellants insist that public declarations in connection with ongoing investigations are not, by themselves, unconstitutional—particularly where law enforcement believes there is a need to ensure compliance or prevent escalation.
Ground Three: Evaluation of Evidence.
On evidentiary grounds, the police argue that the trial judge failed to properly evaluate Exhibits NP4 and NP2.
Exhibit NP4, they state, was an intelligence report relating to the November 3 protest and potential security implications.
Exhibit NP2 was described as an incident report confirming protest activity around the Oworonshoki axis of the Third Mainland Bridge—one of Lagos’ most critical transport arteries.
The appellants argue that intelligence-based intervention is a lawful policing strategy and that officers are not required to wait for formal complaints before acting to forestall potential disorder.
A Broader Constitutional Test.
The appeal sets up a significant appellate review of the balance between civil liberties and state security powers.
While the lower court framed the case as a fundamental rights violation and awarded ₦30 million in damages, the police now argue that the ruling risks narrowing lawful preventive powers necessary to maintain public order in volatile situations.
The appellate court will be asked to determine whether the advisory and “wanted” declaration constituted unconstitutional overreach—or fell within the permissible limits of law enforcement authority under Nigeria’s constitutional framework.
For now, the February 20 judgment stands.
But with the appeal formally entered, the final word on the legality of the police actions will lie with the higher court.
The outcome could redefine how far law enforcement agencies may go in acting on intelligence during politically sensitive protests—and where the constitutional line is drawn between activism and public order.
The National Patriots Movement supports the decision of the Nigeria Police Force to exercise its constitutional right of appeal.
The balance between civil liberties and public order must be carefully defined by appellate review.
In a megacity like Lagos, preventive policing is essential.
Rights are fundamental, but public safety and lawful authority must never be weakened or politicised.
Dr. G. Fraser. MFR
The National Patriots.
Headlinenews.news Special Investigative Report.
