Sowore: Police challenge fundamental rights judgement, insist Intelligence guided wanted declaration
The Nigeria Police Force has filed an appeal challenging a Federal High Court judgment that held Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Olohundare Jimoh, responsible for violating activist Omoyele Sowore’s rights.
The Nigeria Police Force has filed an appeal challenging a Federal High Court judgment that held Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Olohundare Jimoh, responsible for violating activist Omoyele Sowore’s rights.
Justice Musa Kakaki, over the weekend, ruled in Sowore’s favour, awarding him N30 million. The court determined that the police breached Sowore’s right to dignity and restricted his freedom of movement by declaring him wanted and warning him to avoid Lagos ahead of a planned protest in October 2025.
In a Notice of Appeal obtained by our correspondent, the police argued that the trial judge erred in ruling that declaring Sowore wanted was unlawful.
The force maintained that the right to freedom of movement is not absolute and can be limited in the interest of public safety. They explained that the warning was specific to the October 27, 2025, protest, which they said caused significant disruption on major roads and highways.
Read Also: AGF Fagbemi hails Nigeria's $6.2m arbitration win
The police also contended that their actions were necessary to protect lives, property, and public order, noting that protests held on October 27 and November 3, 2025, led to disturbances in parts of Lagos, including the Oworonshoki section of the Third Mainland Bridge. They argued that the court’s judgment failed to properly account for these security concerns.
They argued that the declaration was necessary in the wider interest of maintaining peace, accusing the trial judge of failing to properly consider two key documents- an intelligence report on the planned November 3 protest and an incident report on events of that day.
The police insisted that intelligence reports can lawfully guide security action, even without formal complaints from members of the public.
The appellants are asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court and grant any further orders it considers appropriate in the circumstances.
