This is a report of the sixtieth public hearing of the Oyo State Judicial Panel of Inquiry into Police Brutality, Violation of Rights of Citizens and Unlawful Killings in Oyo State.
Venue: The House of Chiefs, Oyo State House of Assembly, Ibadan, Oyo State.
Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2021.
Today’s sitting commenced at about 9:40am, shortly after the arrival of the Oyo State Judicial Panel members.
Petitions for Further Hearing at the Oyo State Judicial Panel
1. Case No. OYJPPB/034
Mr Salami Sarafadeen v The Nigeria Police, Saki Area Command. The petitioner was present and was represented by D. S. Olabode (Esq.). Meanwhile, the respondent was represented by Mr M. A. Ojeah.
The petition was last adjourned to enable the respondent give a report on the petitioner’s impounded motorcycle. Mr Olabode, the petitioner’s counsel told the Oyo State Judicial Panel that the petitioner’s motorcycle was released to him yesterday, after it was impounded by the police for 545 days.
He therefore appreciated the Oyo State Judicial Panel for the timely intervention in the matter and for the tolerance given to them. He also appreciated the respondent’s counsel, Mr Ojeah for his cooperation in ensuring that the motorcycle was released.
In view of the fact that the petitioner’s motorcycle had been released, petition OYJPPB/034 was adjourned sine die.
2. Case No. OYJPPB/065
The Family of Late Waheed Olanrewaju v The DPO, Mokola Police Station. The family was represented by Saheed Olanrewaju and a legal counsel, Adekola Kareem (Esq.). The respondent on the other hand, was represented by Mr M. A. Ojeah.
At the last adjourned date which was on the 22nd of June, 2021 both parties brought their case to a close, however the Oyo State Judicial Panel insisted that the DPO who handled the case when it was reported at the station as well as Iya Ife and the motorcyclist, must be brought before it.
Meanwhile, Mr Ojeah, the respondent’s counsel said that he was not able to get in touch with the DPO, CSP Janet Salami because she had been deployed to Abuja for a peace keeping assignment. He added that Iya Ife’s phone number was not reachable and he could not get through to her.
In response, the Oyo State Judicial Panel said that the motorcyclist was called on the phone and he answered the call. The panel added that there was a need for the DPO to appear before it for fair hearing and her failure to appear would prompt the panel to make the recommendation as it deems fit.
With that, the petition was adjourned by the Oyo State Judicial Panel till July 6, 2021 for Iya Ife and the motorcyclist to appear before the Oyo State Judicial Panel.
3. Case No. OYJPPB/089
Pastor Ajayi Opeyemi Isaac v The Nigeria Police, Akanran. The petitioner was present but was not represented by a legal counsel. Mr Ojeah appeared on behalf of the respondent.
The petitioner said that he received a text message from his counsel, Mr M. O. Olagunju and the message read that his mum had died, as such he won’t be able to appear before the Oyo State Judicial Panel. He therefore apologised for his absence.
The petition was last adjourned to enable the respondent open a defence. The respondent’s counsel, Mr Ojeah presented his witness, CSP Elijah Adekanye but prayed the Oyo State Judicial Panel for an adjournment due to the absence of the petitioner’s counsel.
The Oyo State Judicial Panel commiserated with Mr M. O. Olagunju and the petition was thereafter adjourned till July 13, 2021 for the respondent to open a defence.
4. Case No. OYJPPB/097
Mr Baaki Gbadebo v Oyo State Security Network Agency. The petitioner was present and was represented by S. A. Olabode (Esq.) who held the brief for A. B. Bello (Esq.). The respondent was represented by Mr Tosin Fijabi, the Principal State Counsel.
The petition was last adjourned to enable the respondent open a defence. However, Mr Fijabi, the respondent’s counsel said that he would rest his case on the evidence given by the petitioner on the grounds that the petitioner had not established a prima facie in his evidence, given on May 20, 2021.
He said that the petitioner did not mention the name of the Amotekun officers whom he alleged to have brutalised him and neither did he make any report at the Amotekun office. He said that the petitioner’s evidence adduced before the Oyo State Judicial Panel contradicts what was contained in his petition dated April 9, 2021 and filed April 12, 2021.
He concluded that the petitioner’s case lacked merit and should therefore be dismissed.
With that, the petition was adjourned sine die.
Petitions for Hearing at the Oyo State Judicial Panel
5. Case No. OYJPPB/019
Mr Sesan Opadotun’s Family v Commissioner of Police, Oyo State. The family was represented by Olorode Oluwaseun, Olunike Opadotun, the petitioner’s mother and a legal counsel, Mosebolatan Oyedeji (Esq.). Mr M. A. Ojeah maintained appearance on behalf of the respondent.
The petitioner’s mother, Mrs Olunike Opadotun appreciated the Oyo State Judicial Panel for the efforts put in to ensure that her son is being treated at Adeoyo Maternity Hospital, Ring Road.
The petition was last adjourned to enable the petitioner’s counsel tender the relevant documents from the bar. With that, Miss Oyedeji, the petitioner’s counsel tendered Mr Sesan Opadotun’s written statement on oath, two x-rays and medical bills before the Oyo State Judicial Panel and they were marked and admitted as exhibits.
Mr Ojeah, the respondent’s counsel on the other hand rested his case on the evidence adduced by the petitioner.
With that, the petition was adjourned sine die.
6. Case No. OYJPPB/098
Mrs Oseni Fatiat Adeola v Inspector Clement Olanrewaju and Two Others. The petitioner was present and was represented by Temitope Adesiyan (Esq.). The respondent on the other hand was absent and was not represented by a legal counsel.
The petitioner’s counsel, Miss Adesiyan said that she filed the petitioner’s written statement on oath before the Oyo State Judicial Panel on the 17th of June, 2021 but does not know if the respondent was served with the hearing notice.
The Oyo State Judicial Panel however maintained that the respondents were served with the hearing notices but there was a need to serve the respondents afresh in order to give room for fair hearing.
With that the petition was adjourned till July 13, 2021 for definite hearing to enable the secretariat effect service on the respondents.
Having gone through the proceedings for today, the hearing was brought to a close at about 11:30am.