Lagos State judicial panel on restitution for victims of SARS related abuses and other matters sitting in Lagos adjourned ruling on the objection raised by the police counsel to it’s continued hearing of a petition in which it stated that the matter had already been dispensed with by the federal high court presided by Justice Buba.

The panel decision followed the submission of the police counsel that a police officer summoned to appear before the panel, one Adekunle Babalola alias Babalawo had been transferred out of Lagos and all attempts made to serve him the witness summons proved unsuccessful, however his contact was discovered and he has been contacted to appear on a suitable date, subject to the permission of the panel.

However a twist was added to the petition when the police counsel informed the panel in the case of Irinyemi Oyetomi vs federal special anti robbery squad (FSARS), that the petition before the panel had been adjudicated upon by honourable Justice Buba of the federal high court in suit number FHC/L/6S573/2017 Taiwo Ikuomola & Engr. Irinyemi Oyetomi vs Inspector General of Police & Commissioner of Police Lagos State in which the court dismissed the application of the petitioners on the 20th of February, 2018.

The police counsel stated that by virtue of the high court judgement, the right of the petitioner lies with the court of appeal rather than the Lagos State judicial panel on police brutality and abuse, he then asked the panel to excuse itself from further hearing of the petition having been dispensed with by a court of competent jurisdiction.

In opposing the application of the Nigeria police counsel, the petitioner counsel stated that justice was not served in the matter with the dismissal of the case by the court, hence the recourse to the panel instead of the court of appeal, coupled with the fact that the petitioner family lacked the financial wherewithal to pursue the case to a logical conclusion at the court.

He further submitted that even if the matter is explored to a logical conclusion and monetary award is made against the police, there is no hope of the police complying with the judgement in terms of paying the awarded sum, hence the petitioner family would rather pitch their tent with the judicial panel with the hope for justice rather than embark on a wild goose chase.

The panel chairman asked the petitioner to show reason why the panel should look into a matter already decided by a court of competent jurisdiction. But the petitioner counsel stated that the issue before the panel has to do with it’s core mandate of police brutality which resulted in the death of the petitioner.

Ruling on the objection and counter objection to the hearing of the petition, the panel adjourned it’s decision on the matter to a date to be communicated to parties in due course.

The panel then went ahead to hear six other petitions out of the nine petitions listed for the day with some concluded with the panel ordering counsels to file their written address on adjourned dates, while for some, further hearing continues.

The panel sittings continues.