A Lagos-based lawyer, Adebayo Adekoya, has called on the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, to probe the alleged harassment of a retired Nigeria Customs Service officer, Akeem Sanyaolu, and unlawful seizure of his property by officers of the Nigeria Police Force from the Zone 2 headquarters covering Lagos and Ogun states.
He specifically urged the police boss to look into the process the officers undertook before and after seizing the vehicles.
Sanyaolu had told PUNCH Metro that he was on a trip outside Lagos on February 5, 2020, when his wife called to notify him that some police officers had forcefully entered his premises.
He alleged that the officers went straight to where he parked his three Ford caravan buses and drove them away.
According to him, the officers who also carted away some documents from his home, carried out the operation without a warrant or court order.
Speaking to our correspondent on Wednesday, his lawyer, Adebayo Adekoya, described the officers’ action as illegal.
He also alleged that the officers failed to produce the file containing the petition to prove it was filed by a complainant.
He said, “From the look of things, it is like the police officers who went to his house carried out an illegal operation. It is like there is no petition and approval at all. Because, as I speak to you, when the petition was written to Abuja, the Inspector General of Police instructed Zone 2 to reopen the case and get all the officers involved to state their side of the story.
“But the information we gathered is that the head of the team that seized those vehicles has failed to release the file. The purported petition on whose behalf they acted would have been in that file. They cannot present it. So, it is either someone just got their ears and they decided to go and pick those vehicles without a court order and proper investigation.”
Before you can release a vehicle to a complainant, you must have obtained the testimonies of the suspect in question, which is Mr Sanyaolu.
Adekoya further alleged that the vehicle was released to the complainant’s lawyer on bond.
According to him, the officers were unable to provide the vehicles despite being released on bond.
“Based on available information, the vehicle was released to the complainant’s lawyer on bond. So the reason why the police could not release the information to the new investigation team is that once the file is released, the evidence of how the vehicle was released illegally will also be visible. Now, we are asking them to produce the vehicle, they cannot produce it and that is well over six months. When you receive something on a bond, you receive it temporarily and anytime there is a need for it, the law says you should bring it back. So, there is a lack of professionalism on the part of the officers and they are trying to cover things up.”
The lawyer also called on the police authorities to direct the previous investigating officers to release the file.
“The police should determine whether the complainant submitted a petition and whether approval has been obtained from the designated approving authority. And if there is approval, did they obtain a court order before going to the house to take the vehicle? And to also find out who they released the vehicle to,” he added.
When contacted on Thursday, October 24, the spokesperson for Zone 2, Ayuba Umma, had earlier promised to make her findings on the allegations.
In response to a follow-up enquiry by our correspondent on Monday, Umma again promised to revert. “I will get back to you,” she said.
Punch
