Evans sues police demanding that they either charge him to court or release him immediately

NOTORIOUS kidnapper Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike popularly known as Evans has filed a fundamental human rights enforcement action before the Lagos Federal High Court demanding that the police either charge him or release him immediately.

Earlier this month, Evans, 36, was arrested by the police in his palatial mansion in the Magodo area of Lagos, bringing to an end years of pursuit. Evans, who dropped out of school in Junior Secondary School Two and confessed to have once collected a $1m ransom fee, was Nigeria's most notorious kidnapper, who masterminded the abduction of public officials, expatriates and rich businessmen and women.

However, formal charges are yet to be filed against him and in response Evans has urged the Lagos high court to order the police to charge him or release him immediately. Joined as respondents in the said suit are the Nigeria Police Force, the commissioner of police, Lagos State and the Special Anti-Robbery Squad, Lagos State Police Command.

In the suit filed on his behalf by a Lagos lawyer, Olukoya Ogungbeje, Evans is seeking a court order directing the respondents to immediately charge him to court if they had any case against him in accordance with sections 35 (1) (c) (3) (4) (5) (a) (b) and 36 of the constitution. Evans is contending that his continued detention by the respondents since June 10, without being charged to court or released on bail was an infringement of his fundamental human rights.

Mr Ogungbeje argued that the respondents ought to have charged Evans to court in accordance with the provisions of sections 35 and 36 of the constitution. He further argued that the alleged offence committed by Evans were correspondingly intertwined with the constitutional safeguards as provided under sections 35 and 36 of the constitution.

In a 27-paragraph affidavit in support of the motion deposed to by Evan’s father, Stephen Onwuamadike, it was averred that the applicant had been subjected to media trial without any court’s order by the respondents. Evans’ father further averred that the media trial and news orchestrated by the respondents had continued to generate reactions in both print and electronic media without his son being afforded fair hearing and trial before a court of law.

Furthermore, the deponent also averred that since his son’s arrest, all his family members had been denied access to him while media practitioners had been granted unfettered access to Evans. Since the filing of the court action, the case has not been assigned to any judge and no date has been fixed for the hearing.