Femi Falana (SAN), the counsel to Omoyele Sowore has reacted to the press release of the Department of State Services (DSS) in which it absolved itself of responsibility for the armed invasion of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Falana in a statement he personally signed on Sunday condemned the DSS for what he called the desecration of Court No 7 of Hon. Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu and the illegal rearrest of Omoyele Sowore.
He said the DSS pretended to forget that the abominable desecration of the Federal High Court was covered live by domestic and international media outlets and journalists.
The full statement;
“The Service argues on the one hand that the arrest of Sowore was “stage managed” by his supporters in order to give the Service a bad name whilst also admitting at the same time that officers of the Service arrested Sowore outside the Court.
“Having declared that the Service arrested Sowore “outside the court”, despite the “stage managing” argument, what the Nigerian people want to see happen is the immediate release of Sowore, pending his trial as ordered by the court.
INDUBITABLE FACTS CONFIRMING DESECRATION OF COURT AND RE-ARREST BY THE SERVICE
“However, the following facts underscore our insistence that the Service was solely responsible for the desecration of the hallowed chambers of the court: By the advantage of information technology, the whole world has placed responsibility for the gangsteric desecration of the court on the SSS.
The SSS cannot extricate itself from the abominable acts of 6th December, 2019. When I informed the court that fresh charges were being filed against our clients and that they could be re-arrested, the prosecution denied any such plan. As soon as the case was adjourned the SSS pounced on Sowore and caused a disruption of the proceedings of the court.
Having taken over the courtroom vi et armis Justice Ojukwu hurriedly rose and asked the Registrar to adjourn all other cases. After the learned trial judge had risen for the day she summoned the heads of the prosecution and defence teams to her chambers.
“When the lead prosecutor, Dr. Liman Hassan SAN denied knowledge of the invasion of her court she directed him to invite the head of the SSS team in the court. When challenged to justify the invasion of the court the officer could not. He apologised to Justice Ojukwu on behalf of the SSS.
The judge then directed the officer to withdraw the SSS operatives from the courtroom. The directive was complied with as the operatives withdrew from the courtroom but rushed out to join their colleagues who had taken over the entire court house.
“Notwithstanding that the SSS could not produce any warrant of arrest for Sowore the defence team decided that I should accompany him to the SSS headquarters in view of his physical brutalisation inside the courtroom and the open threat to his life. I did and ensured that he was driven in my car to the sss headquarters where I handed him over to the officers on duty.
Thereafter, I requested for a meeting with the head of the SSS but I was informed that he was not in the office. Though, ordinarily, officers of the Service do not wear any uniform, on the 6th day of December, some of them were in mufti, many were not only armed but also masked while others disguised in lawyer’s black and white suit.
“Regardless of the form of appearance, the officers of the Service inside Court No. 7 were identifiable by their roles and acts of seizing Sowore and pinning him down. It is an utter poor reasoning to say that Sowore’s supporters were also those bent on injuring him in order to arrest him.
ON RATIONALISATION OF RE-ARREST OF SOWORE BY THE SERVICE In rationalizing the re-arrest of Sowore, which is denied in the same Press statement, the Service alleged that Sowore held meetings with some people. Assuming without conceding that Sowore held meetings with some people in Transcorp Hotel as alleged by the sss, why did the Prosecution not inform the trial court that the defendant had breached his bail conditions?
“ON THE CLAIM OF THE SERVICE THAT IT IS LAW-ABIDING The sss says it is a law abiding institution. But why did it refuse to comply with the order of Justice Taiwo to release Sowore? Why did the sss threaten to report the judge to the NJC for granting bail to Sowore?
Even though I have never appeared before Justice Dimgba I have always known him as a judge of impeccable integrity. So, I challenged the SSS for painting an incorruptible judge with the brush of shame. It was after my intervention that the NJC gave the judge a clean bill of health. Thereafter, the judge was compelled to withdraw from the case.
“The SSS thought that it had won but it was a pyrrhic victory. Thus, Justice John Tsoho (current Chief Judge of the federal high court) to whom the case was assigned reiterated the orders of Justice Dimgba and proceeded to rule that trial would not commence in the case until the defendant was released from custody. It was at that stage that the DSS complied with the order of the federal high court.
In the light of the foregoing we reiterate our demand for the release of not only Sowore in obedience to court orders, pending the verdict of the court in their trial. We equally call for the release of all other political detainees, and criminal suspects who have been admitted to bail pending trial by competent courts.
“Finally, it is common knowledge that this country was ruled by military dictators for about three decades. On no occasion did security operatives invade court premises to arrest political activists inside a courtroom. Therefore, the bizarre harassment of courts cannot be tolerated under a democratically government that claims to operate under the rule of law.”