society

Legal Status of Nullified Order of Arrest

Published

3 years ago

September 13, 2023

Legal Status of Nullified Order of Arrest

The vacation of warrants of arrest, search and commitment to prison on remand against Dr. Akintoye Akindele, the Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of Duport Midstream Company Limited in suit no. CMC/MG/CR/17S/2023 by a Chief Magistrate Court in Nasarawa State sitting at Mararara Gurku is of topical interest.

The Inspector General of Police was the complainant in the suit. By vacating its own order, the court has provided further proof as to the robustness of the judicial system to resist attempts at pressing it into service as a tool for impunity.

There are instances where the police may arrest a person in circumstances where the arrest ought not have been made in the first instance. Such arrests may be nullified by the same court or by courts of equal jurisdiction.

The question which arises is the legal status of such nullified orders of arrest. The grounds for nullification may include defects in the jurisdiction of the court, non- disclosure and/or suppression of crucial information by the police, et cetera.

This publication seeks to lay to rest the status of the unlawful arrest by the police of such a person.

Introduction
This opinion addresses a pivotal issue:

Can a Magistrate Court in Nasarawa State, for example, lawfully issue warrants and committal orders on the bases of untrue/concealed information from the police concerning alleged offenses committed beyond the court’s jurisdiction?
And, where such orders of arrest are made but subsequently quashed, what is the legal status of the quashed order of arrest?
Jurisdictional authority of Magistrate Courts in Nasarawa State.

The bedrock of the authority of Magistrate Courts in Nasarawa State to issue arrest and search warrants is rooted in the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) of Nasarawa State.

This legal framework, meticulously detailed in Sections 35, 36, 143, and 144 of the ACJL Nasarawa State, provides a precise avenue through which these courts can empower law enforcement agencies to apprehend suspects and secure crucial evidence.
However, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations stemming from the territorial jurisdiction of these courts.

For instance, the jurisdictional scope of the Chief Magistrate’s Court in Maraba-Gurku, Nasarawa State, is explicitly defined within the official gazette.

Legal Analysis of the Issue
The key issue for determination is as follows: Do Magistrate Courts possess the capability to extend their arm of authority to issue warrants for offences that transpire beyond the territorial confines of their jurisdiction? This question emanates from the bedrock of Nigerian legal principle on the doctrine of territorial jurisdiction.

The landmark case of REX V. SHODIPO 12 WACA 374 resonates adequately with the geographical limitations on jurisdiction.

Territorial Constraints on the Jurisdiction of Magistrate Courts

It is crucial to acknowledge the limitations that govern the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Court in criminal cases.

This jurisdiction is inherently restricted to the geographical scope of its corresponding state, often defined by delineations within magisterial districts where applicable.
In REX v. SHODIPO 12 WACA 374, the facts, circumstances, and rulings of the West African Court of Appeal vividly demonstrate the profound consequences of errors in jurisdiction.

In this case, an appellant arrested in Lagos for a crime committed in Ijoko, situated within the Abeokuta Magisterial District, triggered a preliminary inquiry that resulted in the appellant’s trial in the Lagos Division of the then Supreme Court.
The charge primarily revolved around fraudulent false accounting, as stipulated under Section 6 of the Criminal Code. Central to the appellant’s argument was Section 64 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, contending that the preliminary inquiry should have transpired within the Abeokuta Magisterial District, rendering the Lagos Magistrate’s proceedings null. The West African Court of Appeal concurred, establishing that the Lagos Magistrate lacked jurisdiction over the preliminary inquiry. Consequently, all ensuing proceedings, including the Supreme Court trial, were null and void. This fundamental principle of criminal justice administration is further enriched by the 2017 reported case of MATHEW V. THE STATE (2017) LPELR-44072(CA), wherein the Court of Appeal, per FATIMA OMORO AKINBAMI, JCA underscored the essence of jurisdiction as the bedrock of adjudication: “Jurisdiction defines the power of the Court to inquire into facts, apply the law, make decisions and declare judgment. The Constitution and statutes which set up the Courts cloak them with powers and jurisdiction of adjudication which are basically substantive and procedural. Thus, where ingredients of an offence occur outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Court asked to adjudicate over the matter, such a Court will not assume jurisdiction over the offence for apparent lack of jurisdiction.” On this score, it is our opinion and as supported by the order voiding the arrest, that the magistrate, ab initio, lacked the jurisdiction to issue the warrant of arrest as none of the alleged elements of the case occurred within his jurisdiction in Nassarawa State.

Non-Disclosure and Suppression of Facts
The issue of non-disclosure of material facts by the Police to the Magistrate is fatal to the legality of the original warrant of arrest. Complainants in criminal litigation, bear the obligation of offering forthright disclosure of facts before the court.

Where complainants, including the Police hide, distort and or obscure the facts from the Magistrate in order to secure a warrant by such deceit, there are legal consequences for such underhand tactics.

In the case of non- disclosure leading to a remand order, the complainant’s failure to disclose pivotal facts—such as the residence and business activities of both the nominal complainant and the defendant(s) casts a shadow of doubt on the veracity and legality of the proceedings.

This concealment assumes the character of a foundational flaw, jeopardizing the structural integrity of the legal process, and ultimately rendering all acts, proceedings, and orders of the court a nullity.
As upheld by the Supreme Court, per Dr. I.T. Muhammed, JSC in DINGYADI &? ANOR V. INEC & 2 ORS (No. 2) (2010) 18 NWLR (PT. 1224), where it stated:

“The law regarding the position of any judgment or order of court which is a nullity for any reason whatsoever, is that the court in its inherent jurisdiction is entitled ex debito justitiae to have that judgment or order set aside on application of an affected or aggrieved party or even suo motu by the court itself.”

The Court’s Authority to Rectify Its Own Errors
In the final analysis, the law is clear that the courts have the inherent jurisdiction to nullify warrants which it had earlier issued in error.

The case of INTERMARKET NIG. V. ADEROUNMU (1998) 12 NWLR (PT. 576) 131 AT 145 stands as a testament to the court’s ability to undo orders erected on shaky foundations. Furthermore, the court’s capacity to set aside its own decisions upon the emergence of concealed material facts is substantiated in cases like ANAEKWE V. MASHASHA (2001) 12 NWLR (PT. 726) 70 AT 91 PARAS D-F and UNIVERSAL TRUST BANK LIMITED & ORS V. DOBMATSCH PHARMACY NIGERIA LIMITED [2008] 156 LRCN 197 AT 216 ZJJ TO 217AK. Embedded within legal doctrine is the principle that a court, upon recognizing concealed material facts that would have significantly influenced its decision, possesses the prerogative to overturn the earlier order.

The potency of concealed facts in corroding the legitimacy of proceedings is underscored by the case of BELLO OGUNDELE & ANOR V. SHITTU AGIRI & ANOR (2009) 12 SC PT 1, 135.
In this pivotal case, the court rendered the judgment of the lower court null and void due to the concealment of crucial facts.
In the words of the court: “The respondents falsely misrepresented the proceedings of Ila Native Court in Suit No HOS/1/79 by concealing the final judgment of that Court, which led to the judgment delivered by the Honorable Justice S.A Oloko in 1981. Consequently, the Judgment of the Lower Court is hereby set aside.”

Similarly, in ANAEKWE V. MASHASHA (2001) 12 NWLR (PT.726) 70, the court observed that: “This court has always the jurisdiction to set aside its own null judgment, or decision… See Chime V. Ude (1996) 7 NWLR (pt. 461) 379 at 438. Where it was held that if the court had acted under misapprehension of facts, the court had the power to set aside its own decision…”
Thus, by implication, when a court corrects its errors by setting aside a judgment or orders made, it is interpreted that such proceedings, judgment, or orders never existed– a total reversal to the circumstances prior to the order made.

In IBRAHIM v. OJONYE (2011) LPELR-3737(CA), the court held that: “It is a cardinal principle of law as submitted by the Appellant’s Counsel, that a judgment remains valid until set aside. However, it is worthy to note that a judgment can be set aside whether it has been executed upon or not. By setting aside a judgment, the said judgment becomes ineffectual and nugatory that nothing can cure it. In that circumstance, both the Court and the parties would revert to or return to their former position before the said judgment was delivered…”

Conclusion
It is evident that when a magistrate court issues orders founded upon concealed facts and pertains to offenses occurring beyond its jurisdiction, the entirety of the proceedings is rendered null and void.
Where such a nullification order has been made, the legal status of the nullified order is that it never existed in the first instance.
The subsequent nullification of such orders underscores the fact that, in the eyes of the law, those orders were as if they were never made.

Therefore, the very act of a Magistrate Court issuing these orders and warrants stands fundamentally illegal, and devoid of legal validity from its inception. As to the defendant, the pathway to seek redress from the complainant, in this case, the Inspector General of Police, for substantial reputational damages and financial losses suffered as a fallout of his detention, is wide open. Depending on how the case plays out in court, it may become a reference point for raising standards of police transparency when seeking a warrant.

Prof. Ikechi Mgbeoji is of Blackfriars LLP, a law firm in Lagos.

society

A Renewed Momentum: How the Chief of Army Staff is Repositioning the Nigerian Army for Decisive Impact

Published

2 hours ago

April 23, 2026

Sahara Weekly

A Renewed Momentum: How the Chief of Army Staff is Repositioning the Nigerian Army for Decisive Impact

By Comrade Oladimeji Odeyemi.

In times of prolonged security challenges, it is easy—almost convenient—for critics to amplify setbacks while ignoring measurable progress. Yet, across Nigeria’s diverse and complex theatres of operation, a different story is steadily unfolding: one of resilience, tactical evolution, and renewed operational effectiveness under the leadership of the Chief of Army Staff, (COAS, Nigerian Army), Lt General Waidi Shaibu.

What we are witnessing today is not a media hype or propaganda—it is the outcome of deliberate reforms, improved coordination, and a reinvigorated fighting spirit within the Nigerian Army.

*A Clear Shift in Operational Effectiveness*

Recent developments across, but not limited to Benue, Plateau, Borno, Yobe, Sokoto, Zamfara, Kogi, Kwara, Edo, and the South-East underscore a critical truth: the Nigerian Army under General Waidi Shaibu is not on the back foot. On the contrary, it is increasingly proactive, intelligence-driven, and responsive.

From the successful rescue of kidnapped civilians in Benue, to the interception of armed militias in Plateau, and the neutralisation of insurgents in Borno, the pattern is consistent—swift response, precision engagement, and tangible outcomes.

These are not isolated victories. They reflect:

– Improved intelligence gathering and utilisation.

– Faster troop deployment and mobility.

– Enhanced inter-agency collaboration.

– Better morale and combat readiness among personnel.

Such coordination, especially in asymmetric warfare, does not happen by chance. It is a direct reflection of leadership at the top.

*The Chief of Army Staff: Lt General Waidi Shaibu Driving Reform and Results*

Since assuming office, the Chief of Army Staff, Lt General Waidi Shaibu has brought a renewed sense of urgency and clarity of purpose to military operations. His leadership style appears anchored on three critical pillars:

*1. Operational Aggression with Discipline*

Troops are no longer merely reacting—they are taking the fight to criminal elements. Whether dismantling terrorist camps in the North Central states or repelling coordinated attacks in the North-East, or engaging the Unknown Gunmen in the SouthEast, the Nigerian Army is demonstrating initiative and dominance.

*2. Intelligence-Led Warfare*

Modern conflicts are won as much with information as with firepower. The increasing success in intercepting logistics suppliers, uncovering IEDs, and preempting attacks shows a system that is becoming smarter, not just stronger.

*3. Joint Force Synergy*

The collaboration between the Army, Air Force, Navy, Police, DSS, and local security groups has significantly improved. Operations in the South Eastern part of the Country and other regions highlight a unified national security architecture—something that has long been advocated but is now visibly taking shape.

*Addressing the Culture of Criticism*

It must be said plainly: criticism is not inherently wrong in a democracy. However, what is deeply problematic is the pattern of uninformed, selective outrage that ignores context, dismisses progress, and undermines morale.

Those who hastily label every security incident as evidence of failure often:

– Ignore the complexity of asymmetric warfare.

– Overlook the sacrifices of frontline personnel.

– Fail to acknowledge the vast geographical and logistical challenges involved.

Worse still, some narratives are built on speculation, ethnic bias, or incomplete information—such as prematurely attributing crimes to specific groups without verification.

This does not help the nation. It weakens it.

*The Reality of the Battlefield*

Nigeria is not facing a conventional war. The threats are:

– Decentralised.

– Embedded within local communities.

– Adaptive and unpredictable.

From insurgents and bandits to kidnappers and economic saboteurs, the battlefield is fluid. Success, therefore, must be measured not by the absence of incidents, but by the capacity to respond, contain, and degrade threats over time.

By this standard, the Nigerian Army is making undeniable progress.

*The Human Element: Courage and Sacrifice*

Behind every operation report is a human story—soldiers who leave their families behind, who endure harsh terrains, who confront danger daily so that millions of Nigerians can live in relative safety.

Some pay the ultimate price.

To reduce their efforts to mere statistics or dismiss them outright is not just unfair—it is unjust.

*A Call for National Support*

The progress being recorded today must be sustained, and that requires more than military effort. It demands:

– Public cooperation with security agencies.

– Responsible media reporting.

– Community vigilance against criminal infiltration

– Constructive, informed criticism where necessary.

Most importantly, it requires national unity in purpose.

*Conclusion: A Force Worthy of Confidence*

The Nigerian Army, under the leadership of the Chief of Army Staff, Lt General Waidi Shaibu is demonstrating that with the right direction, commitment, and strategy, meaningful progress is possible—even in the face of complex security challenges.

The gains may not always make screaming headlines, but they are real. They are measurable. And they are building momentum.

Rather than constant condemnation, what the Armed Forces deserve at this critical time is recognition, encouragement, and unwavering support.

Because beyond the noise of criticism lies a simple truth:

these men and women are standing between order and chaos—and they are holding the line.

This article was written by Comrade Oladimeji Odeyemi, an entrepreneur and an opinion moulder from Ibadan, Oyo State.

society

RESPONSIBLE RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE NIGERIAN ARMY

Published

3 hours ago

April 23, 2026

Sahara Weekly

RESPONSIBLE RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE NIGERIAN ARMY

By Brigadier General D.G. James (Rtd.)

LAGOS — A recent publication by Sahara Reporters alleging systemic corruption, the creation of “mushroom units,” inflated budgets, and operational sabotage within the Nigerian Army has sparked concern across security and public circles.

But a retired senior officer, Brigadier General D.G. James, has pushed back strongly, describing the claims as unsubstantiated, misleading, and damaging to the integrity of an institution that has borne the brunt of Nigeria’s internal security battles for over a decade.

Having served for 30 years across the North-East, North-West, and Niger Delta, the retired general said his intervention is not in defence of any individual, but of the institution itself.

Questioning Anonymous Claims

At the heart of the controversial report is a single unnamed source described as a “top military strategist.” General James argues that such anonymity, without corroborating evidence, weakens the credibility of the allegations.

“Serious claims about budgets, personnel, and logistics must be backed by verifiable documents, not vague assertions,” he said, challenging the publication to provide concrete proof, including records or sworn statements.

“Mushroom Units” or Operational Necessity?

The report’s claim that under-strength units were created to inflate budgets was also dismissed as a misunderstanding of modern counter-insurgency operations.

According to the retired officer, Nigeria’s evolving security threats — from Boko Haram and ISWAP in the North-East to banditry in the North-West and separatist tensions in the South-East, have necessitated the creation of flexible task forces and new formations.

“Operating below full strength is not evidence of corruption,” he said. “It reflects battlefield realities , casualties, redeployments, and expansion under pressure.”

Payroll and Logistics Allegations

On claims of double-counting personnel for financial gain, General James described the scenario as “logistically implausible,” citing centralized payroll systems tied to biometric verification.

He further noted that accusations of fuel diversion ignore broader structural issues within Nigeria’s budgeting system.

“Funds approved on paper are often not fully released. By the time allocations reach operational units, commanders are forced to manage limited resources,” he explained.

Reaction to Benisheik Reference

General James also condemned the report’s reference to the death of Brigadier General Oseni Braimah during an ISWAP attack in Benisheik, calling it an inappropriate attempt to link battlefield losses to alleged corruption.

“Using the death of a fallen officer to support unverified claims is deeply disrespectful,” he said.

Broader Accountability

While not dismissing the possibility of corruption in defence spending, the retired general emphasized that responsibility cannot be placed solely on the military.
He pointed to the role of the National Assembly in budget approvals and civilian institutions in oversight and prosecution.

“If there are flaws in the system, they are systemic , not exclusive to the armed forces,” he noted.

Call for Transparent Investigation

General James called for a thorough and independent investigation into the allegations, urging authorities to rely on verifiable evidence rather than media narratives.

“Let every claim be examined , but fairly, transparently, and without prejudice,” he said.

Reaffirming his lifelong loyalty to the military, the retired officer urged Nigerians to approach such reports with caution.
“Our soldiers have made enormous sacrifices in defence of this country. Allegations alone should not overshadow those realities,” he stated.

society

IGP Closes PMF Commanders’ Training, Pledges Better Welfare, Tactical Capacity

Published

14 hours ago

April 22, 2026

Sahara Weekly

IGP Closes PMF Commanders’ Training, Pledges Better Welfare, Tactical Capacity

The Inspector-General of Police, IGP Olatunji Rilwan Disu, on Wednesday closed a Squadron Commanders’ Training Programme at the Police Mobile Force (PMF) Training College in Ende-Hills, Nasarawa State, vowing to strengthen leadership and operational effectiveness across the force.

At the ceremony, the IGP inspected training facilities including the simulation ground and shooting range, where he personally took part in tactical exercises. He told cadets of the Nigeria Police Academy undergoing training at the college to remain disciplined and focused, stressing that their effectiveness on the field would depend on the quality of their training.

“Resilience, professionalism, and strict adherence to human rights principles must guide your conduct,” Disu said.

Addressing the graduating squadron commanders, he urged them to apply their newly acquired skills in leadership, operational discipline, and tactical efficiency. He described the PMF as a “highly disciplined, responsive, and reliable tactical arm” of the Nigeria Police Force.

The IGP further reaffirmed his commitment to improving officers’ welfare and boosting operational capacity, assuring that formations would be adequately equipped to tackle evolving security challenges nationwide.