Documents sighted have shown that the action of the Assistant Inspector General of Police, Zone 2 Command, Onikan, Lagos, (AIG) in providing police protection to Skyview Properties Limited over Plot 37, Block 77, Lekki Peninsula Scheme I, Lekki, was based on a valid judgment of the Lagos High Court and forensic evidence, contrary to allegations of bias and land grabbing.
The facts emerged from a Certified True Copy of judgment in Suit No. LD/1006CMW/2015 – Skyview Properties Limited Vs Mr Samuel Alao Ajibode & 2 others, delivered on 30th June, 2025 by Hon. Justice K.A. Jose (Mrs) of the Lagos High Court, and an application for police protection dated 21st October, 2026, duly acknowledged by the office of the AIG.
According to the application written by C.O. Toyin Pinheiro & Co., solicitors to Skyview Properties, the company had approached the High Court in 2015 to confirm its title to the property registered as No. 37 at Page 37 in Volume 2491 of the Lagos Lands Registry, after the 1st defendant, Mr Samuel Alao Ajibode, who had earlier transferred his interest via a Deed of Assignment, allegedly continued to lay claim and trespass on the land.
Court records showed that Skyview sought declarations that by virtue of the Deed of Assignment, Ajibode is no longer entitled to parade himself as holder of Certificate of Occupancy No. 50 at Page 50 in Volume 1990 covering the same Plot 37, Block 77, Lekki Peninsula Scheme 1, and asked for perpetual injunction and N100 million damages for trespass and harassment.
In his defence and counter-claim, Ajibode claimed to be the original 1990 allottee of the land and alleged that the Deed of Assignment dated 11th January, 2011 was forged and null and void, asking the court to re-allocate the land to him.
However, the court relied on forensic evidence tendered by the Nigeria Police Force to resolve the forgery allegation. Two police forensic experts, including DSP Samuel Ode of Force CID Alagbon and retired DSP Reginald Udenze, a forensic document examiner, were called as witnesses.
The forensic report, admitted as Exhibit C1, disclosed that with the aid of scientific equipment including Video Spectral Comparator, documents labelled A-F were examined and it was scientifically established that the same person signed all the documents, and that the specimen signatures of Ajibode matched the signatures on the Deed of Assignment and payment receipts, proving that he indeed sold and collected money.
On the strength of that evidence, Justice Jose held that Skyview Properties proved transfer of interest via a valid Deed of Assignment and dismissed Ajibode’s claim of forgery as unsubstantiated, while also declaring that the purported revocation notice dated 8th August, 2016 issued by the Lagos State Attorney General and Executive Secretary, Lands Bureau, was unconstitutional, null and void for failure to give fair hearing and pay compensation.
Legal experts who spoke on the matter said with a valid subsisting judgment in favour of Skyview, the Nigeria Police Force is empowered under Section 4 of the Police Act, 2020 to provide protection for lives and property and to prevent breach of public peace, especially when a judgment creditor seeks to exercise possessory rights over land confirmed by court.
They noted that the letter for protection dated 21st October, 2026 and stamped as received by the AIG Zone 2 Command on same day, clearly stated that the purpose was to enable the judgment creditor carry out development and construction without breach of peace, and offered logistics support in line with standard police procedure, and not a clandestine operation.
Sources at Zone 2 further explained that police protection based on court judgment does not amount to execution of judgment, which is the duty of sheriffs, but a preventive law and order measure to ensure that lawful owners are not attacked by thugs while developing property already confirmed by court.
On the allegation of bias, the documents show that the police had earlier investigated the forgery claim made by Ajibode itself and its own forensic unit indicted him, meaning the police could not have turned around to protect him against a court judgment that relied on police investigation.
It was also observed that the proper remedy for any party dissatisfied with the High Court judgment of 30th June, 2025 is to file an appeal at the Court of Appeal, and not to resort to media trial and petition against the AIG who acted on an acknowledged official request.
A senior lawyer noted that attempts to use petitions to stop police from protecting judgment creditors, if allowed, would create anarchy where judgments of competent courts are rendered ineffective and land grabbers resort to self-help and social media blackmail against law enforcement.
However, the court relied on forensic evidence tendered by the Nigeria Police Force to resolve the forgery allegation. Two police forensic experts, including DSP Samuel Ode of Force CID Alagbon and retired DSP Reginald Udenze, a forensic document examiner, were called as witnesses.
The forensic report, admitted as Exhibit C1, disclosed that with the aid of scientific equipment including Video Spectral Comparator, documents labelled A-F were examined and it was scientifically established that the same person signed all the documents, and that the specimen signatures of Ajibode matched the signatures on the Deed of Assignment and payment receipts, proving that he indeed sold and collected money.
On the strength of that evidence, Justice Jose held that Skyview Properties proved transfer of interest via a valid Deed of Assignment and dismissed Ajibode’s claim of forgery as unsubstantiated, while also declaring that the purported revocation notice dated 8th August, 2016 issued by the Lagos State Attorney General and Executive Secretary, Lands Bureau, was unconstitutional, null and void for failure to give fair hearing and pay compensation.
Legal experts who spoke on the matter said with a valid subsisting judgment in favour of Skyview, the Nigeria Police Force is empowered under Section 4 of the Police Act, 2020 to provide protection for lives and property and to prevent breach of public peace, especially when a judgment creditor seeks to exercise possessory rights over land confirmed by court.
They noted that the letter for protection dated 21st October, 2026 and stamped as received by the AIG Zone 2 Command on same day, clearly stated that the purpose was to enable the judgment creditor carry out development and construction without breach of peace, and offered logistics support in line with standard police procedure, and not a clandestine operation.
Sources at Zone 2 further explained that police protection based on court judgment does not amount to execution of judgment, which is the duty of sheriffs, but a preventive law and order measure to ensure that lawful owners are not attacked by thugs while developing property already confirmed by court.
On the allegation of bias, the documents show that the police had earlier investigated the forgery claim made by Ajibode itself and its own forensic unit indicted him, meaning the police could not have turned around to protect him against a court judgment that relied on police investigation.
It was also observed that the proper remedy for any party dissatisfied with the High Court judgment of 30th June, 2025 is to file an appeal at the Court of Appeal, and not to resort to media trial and petition against the AIG who acted on an acknowledged official request.
A senior lawyer noted that attempts to use petitions to stop police from protecting judgment creditors, if allowed, would create anarchy where judgments of competent courts are rendered ineffective and land grabbers resort to self-help and social media blackmail against law enforcement.
