The Lagos State High Court has declared the six-month detention of businessman Bassey Ikpi Ubi over a failed foreign exchange transaction illegal and unconstitutional, ordering the police and private respondents to pay N50 million in damages for torture and unlawful detention.
Justice O. O. Adewunmi-Oshin held that the Nigeria Police Force has no legal authority to act as a debt recovery agency or to mediate private civil disputes.
The ruling was delivered on Monday, 11 May 2026, at the Lagos Judicial Division, High Court No. 49, in Suit No. LD/18019MFHR/2024.
Mr. Ubi, Managing Director of MC COY IKPI BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, had sued the Inspector General of Police, the Assistant Inspector General Zone 2, the DSS, the EFCC, and 11 private individuals and corporate entities.
He alleged that he was arrested and detained on Friday,16 February 2024, tortured almost to death in custody, denied bail, and had his Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 4 and Tecno phones forcibly taken and hacked.
The applicant told the court that the dispute arose from a failed foreign exchange transaction and that the police were being used by private respondents to recover civil debts.
Justice Adewunmi-Oshin stated unequivocally that “the police are not debt collectors and the detention cell is not a venue for settling private disputes.”
The court observed with concern what it called a recurring trend whereby officers of the Nigeria Police Force arrest and detain citizens under the pretext of criminality while the underlying dispute amounts to nothing more than a breach of contract or a failed commercial transaction.
“This Court observes with concern the recurring trend whereby officers of the Nigeria Police Force arrest and detain Citizens under the pretext of Criminality, while the underlying dispute amounts to nothing more than a breach of contract or a failed commercial transaction,” the judge said.
“Such conduct finds no warrant in law. Sections 4 of the Police Act 2020 above cited does not confer any power to act as debt collectors or to mediate private civil disputes.”
Citing _Fawehimi V Inspector General of Police_ (2002) 7 NWLR pt 767 pg 606, the court reiterated that
“the Police must not allow themselves to be used as tools for the enforcement of Civil obligations.”
The judge also referenced Section 6 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which makes clear that arrest shall only be made for a reasonable suspicion of a criminal offence, not for the recovery of debts or enforcement of contractual obligations.
On the applicant’s detention, the court found that holding him for six months without bringing him before a court violated Sections 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution, as well as Articles 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
The judge further declared that the seizure and hacking of the applicant’s phones by the 4th respondent infringed his right to privacy and personal liberty guaranteed under Sections 35 and 37 of the Constitution.
Consequently, the court granted 11 orders. It restrained the 1st to 5th respondents from acting as recovery agents or from further arresting and detaining the applicant and officers of his company.
It ordered the 4th respondent to unconditionally release the seized phones. The court awarded N50,000,000 jointly and severally against all respondents for general, aggravated and exemplary damages, to be paid within 30 days.
It also directed the respondents to publish a public apology to the applicant in a full-page advertorial in a national daily newspaper within 14 days, in line with Section 35(6) of the Constitution.
“The practice is condemned in the strongest terms and the leadership of the Nigeria Police Force is expected to take immediate disciplinary and administrative steps to eradicate it,” Justice Adewunmi-Oshin ruled.
The applicant was represented by Kennedy Osunwa with J. Akor, while M. O. Bajela appeared for the 4th respondent. The 18th and 24th respondents had earlier been struck out of the suit.
