An Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan, Friday ordered the Federal Government of Nigeria to pay the sum of N20billion to Chief Sunday Adeyemo also known as Ogbeni Sunday Igboho as damages for the invasion of his residence. 
The court also dismissed an application filed by the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, challenging its jurisdiction to hear allegations against Nigerian government agencies.
READ ALSO: Confusion As Armed Robbers Hijack DSS’ Sunday Igboho Case File – Lawyer
The court was expected to deliver judgment or ruling on the N500 billion fundamental human rights case instituted by the Yoruba Nation activist, Sunday Adeyemo, aka Sunday Igboho against the Nigerian Government and Department of State Services (DSS).
Igboho through his lawyer, Yomi Alliyu, filed a suit challenging the invasion of his house in Ibadan on July 1 by operatives of the DSS, also known as the State Security Service (SSS) or secret police. Igboho is, among others, seeking an order of the court to declare the invasion of his residence by DSS operatives as illegal and an infringement on his fundamental human rights. The three respondents are the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), as the first respondent, SSS as the second respondent, and Director of SSS in Oyo State as the third respondent.
Counsel for the AGF, Abubakar Abdullahi had filed an application challenging the ability of a state High Court to hear the activities of Nigerian government agencies. But citing several judgments by the Supreme and Appeal courts in respect of the ability of the state high court to hear such cases, Justice Ladiran Akintola said the invasion of the house of the applicant violated his fundamental human rights as stipulated in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.
READ ALSO: Yoruba Nation: DSS Releases Two More Aides Of Sunday Igboho
“Unfortunately, this court is not a Father Christmas and cannot award the sum of N500 billion as requested by the applicant but the court retrained the respondent from arresting or harassing the applicant. He has right to his free movement as contained in section 35.1 (a)(b) of the 1999 constitution as amended.” 
Watch our trending video of the day below;
Photo Credit: Getty
