Abuja Lawyer Challenges DSS Role in Civil Dispute

From Emmanuel Ologun, Abuja

An Abuja-based human rights advocate and lawyer, Barrister David Akatugba, has instituted a suit before the FCT High Court against the FCT Command of the Department of State Services (DSS) and two other persons over alleged threats, harassment and abuse of power.

The suit, filed through an originating summons, listed Mr. Mike Israel Nwadiogbu and Mr. Victor Japhet Olegbunne as the second and third respondents respectively.
In the action, Barr. Akatugba is seeking the enforcement of his fundamental rights to freedom, dignity of the human person, personal liberty and privacy as guaranteed under Sections 34, 35, 37 and 46 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
The applicant alleged that operatives of the DSS, acting at the instance of the second and third respondents, subjected him to repeated invitations, harassment, threats and intimidation over a civil transaction involving the sale of landed property.
According to the court documents, the applicant stated that he received a series of phone calls, text messages and WhatsApp messages allegedly threatening him with arrest and detention unless he made payments demanded by the other parties.
Barr. Akatugba urged the court to determine whether the DSS has the legal authority to intervene in a purely civil matter by inviting, threatening or detaining a citizen to enforce payment or resolve a private dispute without first determining the issues in contention.
He also asked the court to decide whether the actions of the second and third respondents, in allegedly using the instrumentality of the DSS, amounted to an abuse of state powers and a violation of his constitutional rights.
The lawyer further relied on Articles 4, 5, 6 and 12 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, as part of the legal basis for his claims.
He maintained that the alleged harassment breached his constitutional rights and constituted a threat to his dignity, personal liberty and privacy as a citizen.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit. However, court documents circulated to the media indicated that the respondents have been given five working days to respond to the summons.