The Counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, yesterday said the Court of Appeal sitting in Enugu presided over by Justice Abdul-Azeez Waziri, has upheld the judgment of the Enugu State High Court which declared the arrest and detention of Stephen Egwuatu by the State Security Services, SSS, as unlawful and violation of his fundamental rights as well as fined the SSS, N5 million.
Egwuatu, now 16 years old was said to have been arrested when he was 12-year-old on the November 8, 2021. He was however, released on November 11, 2021.
The IPOB, lawyer in a statement recalled after the Enugu High Court had earlier declared the SSS arrest of Egwuatu as illegal and fined SSS N5 million, SSS appealed judgment.
According to the statement, the Court of Appeal has however affirmed the earlier judgment of the Enugu State High court and insisted that the SSS should pay the N5 million fine.
Giving insight into the case, Ejiofor said: “The Court of Appeal sitting in Enugu judicial Division has just delivered a landmark judgment in Appeal by the State Security Service, versus Stephen Egwatu, filed by the SSS to challenge the decision of the Enugu State High Court. The High Court had, on 4th July, 2023, declared the arrest and detention of Mr. Stephen Egwuatu unlawful, describing it as a vicious violation of his fundamental rights.”
“It is pertinent to note that Stephen was only 12years at the time of his arrest and detention. Although he was arrested on the 8th November, 2021 and released on 11th November, 2021; the court strongly condemned the actions of the SSS, in the unlawful arrest and detention of an innocent minor, and consequently awarded a cost of N5 million against the SSS. The SSS, however, through the Enugu State Ministry of Justice, appealed against the said judgment.”
“In a unanimous Judgment delivered today, 27th March, 2025, the Court of Appeal, Enugu Division, dismissed the appeal as unmeritorious. My Lord the Hon. Justice Abdul-Azeez Waziri (JCA), who read the lead judgment, upheld the Judgment of the High Court and reaffirmed the punitive cost awarded against the SSS.”
