0
A Lagos-based lawyer, Kabir Akingbolu, has asked the Federal High Court in Lagos to determine whether Nigeria’s top security officials can be held accountable for the persistent wave of insecurity across the country, including kidnappings, banditry, terrorism and violent attacks.
In a suit marked FHC/LAG/CS/986/2026, Akingbolu dragged the Inspector-General of Police, the Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS), the National Security Adviser, the Chief of Defence Staff, the Chief of Army Staff, the Chief of Air Staff, the Chief of Naval Staff, the Comptroller-General of Customs, the Comptroller-General of Immigration, and the Commandant-General of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps before the court.
The plaintiff, through an Originating Summons filed before the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court, is seeking judicial interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions relating to the responsibilities of public officers charged with national security.
Among the questions submitted for determination is whether the persistent and widespread insecurity, loss of lives, kidnappings, banditry, terrorism and other violent crimes across the federation constitute a failure by the defendants to discharge the constitutional and statutory duties attached to their offices.
He also wants the court to determine whether the defendants, as public officers responsible for maintaining internal security, protecting lives and property, and preserving Nigeria’s territorial integrity, are accountable to citizens for alleged acts of omission, negligence and failure to effectively perform their duties.
The plaintiff further seeks a pronouncement on whether Nigerian citizens are entitled to seek judicial intervention where there is an alleged failure by public authorities responsible for national security to adequately protect lives and property.
In the suit, Akingbolu is asking the court to declare that the persistent failure of security institutions to effectively discharge their constitutional mandates amounts to a breach of obligations imposed by the Constitution and various statutes establishing the agencies.
He is also seeking declarations affirming that the security and welfare of the people remain the primary purpose of government and that public officers charged with security responsibilities are under a constitutional duty to protect lives and property.
According to the claimant, the continued incidents of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, armed attacks and other violent crimes across the federation pose a serious challenge to the fulfilment of the constitutional and statutory obligations imposed on the defendants and the agencies under their control.
He is equally asking the court to declare that the defendants owe a constitutional and statutory duty to take all lawful and necessary measures within their respective powers to ensure the protection of lives and property throughout Nigeria.
As part of the reliefs sought, Akingbolu urged the court to direct the defendants to resign from their respective positions for what he described as failure to discharge the constitutional and statutory duties attached to their offices.
He is also seeking an order compelling the defendants to periodically review and strengthen existing security mechanisms and inter-agency cooperation for the purpose of combating insecurity across the federation.
“In an affidavit filed in support of the suit, the lawyer stated that his legal practice cuts across several states of the federation but that the prevailing security situation has adversely affected his ability to travel and attend to clients’ matters.”
In the suit, he also noted that incidents of kidnapping, killings, maiming and destruction of property have made movement around the country increasingly unsafe, affecting both his livelihood and legal practice.
Akingbolu further deposed that insecurity has resulted in loss of lives, destruction of public and private property, displacement of citizens and adverse consequences for businesses, investments and economic activities.
According to him, numerous reports of kidnappings, attacks on communities and other violent crimes continue to be reported across the country despite the existence of security agencies charged with maintaining public safety.
The claimant maintained that the issues raised in the suit concern the constitutional obligations of public authorities entrusted with the security of the nation and said the action was instituted in the public interest.
In a written address accompanying the suit, Akingbolu argued that Nigerian jurisprudence now recognises public interest litigation, particularly in matters involving constitutional governance, accountability of public institutions and public rights.
He contended that the security of lives and property affects every Nigerian citizen and that citizens should not be denied access to the courts where they seek constitutional interpretation relating to governmental obligations touching on the protection of life and public safety.
The lawyer urged the court to resolve all the questions submitted for determination in his favour and grant the reliefs sought.
