Group chides withdrawal of orderly of Rivers Judge who gave judgement against police
The Society for Rule of Law in Nigeria (SRLN) has described the withdrawal of the police orderly to a judge in Rivers State who gave judgment against the Nigeria Police Force in a suit number PHC/1785/CR/2024, as worrisome, and abuse of power, which must be condemned by all Nigerians.
The group, in a statement on Friday, by its Coordinator, Dr Chima Ubeku, said the Nigeria Police Force must be reminded that its authority is derived from the people, not imposed upon them, urging the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, to urgently investigate the circumstances surrounding the withdrawal of the judge’s orderly and ensure the immediate restoration of her security.
SRLN called on the Nigerian Bar Association, the National Judicial Council, and civil society organizations to unite to defend the independence of the judiciary, lamenting the danger in leaving the guardians of justice exposed.
The statement read; In a development that has ignited national debate over judicial independence and police accountability, the High Court of Rivers State recently delivered a groundbreaking judgment in Commissioner of Police v. Joy Uwheraka & Ors (SUIT NO: PHC/1785/CR/2024), exposing grave inconsistencies, abuses of process, and unlawful conduct within the Nigeria Police Force. The judgment, rendered by a judge of the High Court of Rivers State, not only exonerated innocent citizens wrongly charged with murder but also reaffirmed the supremacy of the Constitution over the coercive arms of state power.
In the wake of this bold judicial pronouncement, reports have surfaced that the Police authorities have withdrawn the judge’s orderly a move widely perceived as an act of retaliation and intimidation. This action is not only unconstitutional but strikes at the very heart of Nigeria’s democracy.
In the 2025 judgment, the court meticulously dissected the prosecution’s case, exposing contradictions, false testimony, and fabricated evidence advanced by police witnesses. The court observed that the officers who are prosecution witnesses contradicted themselves under cross-examination, fabricated statements, and failed to establish credible evidence of guilt against the twelve defendants who had been arbitrarily arrested and charged with murder following a roadside altercation.
The court’s findings revealed that the so-called “eyewitnesses” among the police gave mutually inconsistent testimonies, often contradicting video and forensic evidence tendered by the prosecution itself. Exhibit P23A (a video recording of the scene) showed that the defendants were unarmed, unaggressive, and non-violent, directly disproving the police narrative that they had killed a female officer with planks and stones.
In a rare show of judicial candour, the court condemned the police for manufacturing evidence, coercing statements, and “speaking from both sides of the mouth.” The court described the prosecution’s conduct as “a gross abuse of the criminal process that offends the conscience of justice.” Ultimately, all twelve defendants were discharged and acquitted, reaffirming that justice must not be built on deceit or oppression.
Shortly after this historic judgment, the police reportedly withdrew the judge’s orderly, an unmistakable act of institutional reprisal.
Such a measure, coming immediately after a decision unfavorable to the police, sends a dangerous message: that judges who refuse to rubber-stamp abuse may be punished.
The action against the Rivers State judge is a litmus test for Nigeria’s democracy. It is a moment for the nation to decide whether it will allow fear to silence the fearless. The judiciary’s independence is the heartbeat of any free society. To punish a judge for doing her job is to erode the foundations of that freedom.
