Nigerian singer Darlington Achakpo, popularly known as Speed Darlington, has initiated a ₦300 million lawsuit against Inspector-General of Police Kayode Egbetokun, alleging unlawful detention and violation of his fundamental human rights.
The legal proceedings stem from Speed Darlington’s arrest on October 4, 2024, following allegations of defamation and cyberstalking directed at fellow artist Damini Ogulu, known professionally as Burna Boy. Human rights activist Deji Adeyanju reported that Darlington was apprehended in Lagos State after a petition by Burna Boy and subsequently transferred to Abuja, where he was detained.
During his initial detention, Darlington was reportedly held for five days without formal charges, during which he alleges he was subjected to severe torture and maltreatment. He was released on bail on October 8, 2024. However, on November 27, 2024, he was re-arrested for allegedly violating the terms of his administrative bail, despite notifying authorities of a medical emergency and obtaining permission to travel to Owerri, Imo State, for a performance.
In response to his detention, Speed Darlington filed a fundamental rights enforcement suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/1832/2024) at the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking several reliefs:
A declaration that his arrest and detention violated his fundamental rights as guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution.
An order directing the Inspector-General of Police to immediately and unconditionally release him from custody.
Alternatively, an order mandating the Inspector-General to produce him before the court to inquire into the circumstances of his arrest and detention and, if deemed fit, admit him to bail.
An order directing the respondent to pay ₦300 million as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages for unlawful and continued detention.
On December 23, 2024, Justice Musa Liman ordered the Inspector-General to charge Speed Darlington to court or release him on bail unconditionally within 48 hours. Despite this directive, Darlington remained in detention. During a subsequent hearing on January 6, 2025, Darlington’s counsel, Abubakar Marshal, requested an adjournment to allow the police’s lawyer, Garba Audu, time to review and respond to the served documents. Justice Liman granted the request and scheduled the hearing for January 13, 2025.
The police contend that they had already filed a criminal charge against Speed Darlington before he filed the motion for his release. They allege that Darlington was admitted to administrative bail but subsequently jumped bail. The charge, filed before Justice Ekerete Akpan, was scheduled for hearing in December 2024 but was delayed. The arraignment is now set for January 15, 2025. The police maintain that they did not flout the court’s order, citing difficulties in arraigning the defendant during the Christmas holiday.
Speed Darlington’s legal team alleges that his continuous detention without arraignment contravenes his constitutional rights. They describe him as the breadwinner of his family and argue that his prolonged detention has caused undue hardship. The affidavit supporting the suit details the alleged torture and inhumane conditions he endured during his detention.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed January 13, 2025, for the hearing of Speed Darlington’s fundamental rights enforcement suit. Additionally, his arraignment on the criminal charges filed by the police is scheduled for January 15, 2025, before Justice Ekerete Akpan. These proceedings will determine the legality of his detention and address the allegations against him.
This case highlights the tension between law enforcement practices and individual rights in Nigeria. It underscores the importance of adhering to due process and the rule of law, especially concerning the detention of individuals without formal charges. The outcome of these proceedings could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, emphasizing the need for accountability and respect for human rights by law enforcement agencies.
As the hearings approach, all eyes will be on the Federal High Court to see how it navigates the complex interplay of individual rights, law enforcement authority, and the quest for justice in this high-profile case.