Mohammed O. Taoheed reports,
Mr Femi Falana (SAN), a human rights lawyer, has dragged President Muhammadu Buhari, the National Assembly and the Controller General of the Correctional Service, to court over the fresh attack on the Kuje Correctional Center, Abuja, by unknown bandits.
Track News Nigeria gathered that Falana, in the suit filed at the Federal High Court, Lagos, was soliciting an order of court compelling the defendants to provide relevant security apparatus across correctional centers in the country in line with the law.
The plaintiff in the suit marked: FHC/L/CS/1580/2022 and dated August 23, 2022, blamed the attack that that saw the released of over 600 inmates including 64 Boko Haram terrorists on the absence of vital security and monitoring equipment at the Kuje Correctional Center.
In a 12 paragraph affidavit deposed to in support of the suit, plaintiff submitted that investigations revealed “that the correctional facility was not equipped with close circuit televisions and other security monitoring devices that it ought to have been equipped with.”
Deponent of the affidavit, Mr Ayodele Aribisala, argued that: “The failure of the federal government to provide these security equipment amounted to a contravention of the provisions of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act 2019.”
He also claimed that the purpose of the legal action was to challenge the contravention and non-compliance of the above provision of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act by the Defendants.
Amongst the issues for determination as were, “Whether the defendants are not under a legal obligation to provide monitoring devices, close circuit television and other instruments of restraint at correctional centers in line with Section 28 (1) of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act.
“Whether the defendants are not under a legal obligation to establish and maintain a fully equipped armed squad, intelligence and at correctional centers in line with Section 28 (2) of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act.”
Mrs Funmi Falana, the counsel to the plaintiff, the counsel to the plaintiff, gave that if the questions were answered in his favour, the court should proclaim, “that by virtue of Section 28 (1), (2) & (3) of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act, the defendants are under a legal obligation to provide monitoring devices to protect, control and safeguard correctional activities, including observatory towers, double perimeter walls, close circuit television, body scanners, e-monitoring devices, electrically activated alarm systems and other instruments of restraint.
Then, he called on the court to make an order “directing the defendants to fully comply with the provisions of Section 28 (1), (2) & (3) of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act.
