Sunday Igboho goes to Supreme Court, insists on N20b compensation for his hounding by Buhari

Sunday Igboho goes to Supreme Court over Appeal Court quashing of lower court judgment

By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor

Sunday Adeyemo, Yoruba nation activist popularly known as Sunday Igboho, has challenged the ruling of the Court of Appeal which dismissed a lower court judgment that awarded him N20 billion compensation for aggravated damages for the invasion of his residence by the Department of State Services (DSS) in 2021, ordered by former President Muhammadu Buhari.

The DSS on 1 July 2021 raided Igboho’s residence in Ibadan, killed two of his allies and destroyed properties, including cars and other valuables.

Igboho escaped the attack but was later arrested in Benin Republic on his way to joining his family in Germany.

He filed a lawsuit against the DSS and the federal Attorney General at an Oyo State High Court for violation of his fundamental human rights.

Judge Ladiran Akintola in his ruling in September of the same year, awarded N20 billion damages against the federal government.

However, the Appeal Court in Abadan presided over by Justice Muslim Hassan in its judgement delivered in August 2022, nullified the verdict of the lower court that declared the attack on Igboho’s residence as illegal.

The appellate court described the award of damages against the federal government as outrageous.

Igboho listed 19 grounds of appeal in a suit marked SC/CV/1436/22 filed by his counsel, Yomi Alliu, before the Supreme Court and dated 10 March 2025.

Those joined as defendants include the federal Attorney General, DSS, and Director of DSS in Oyo State.

In the filing, Igboho asked the top court to, among others, determine:

• “Whether his fundamental rights had been breached and/or threatened to be breached thereby situating his application in fundamental rights enforcement proceeding than in torts as held by the Lower Court. (Grounds 1 & 2).”

• “Whether the Lower Court could discountenance, as it did, the preliminary objections raised by the appellant simply because it was raised in his brief and because there were other good grounds that could maintain the appeal (Grounds 3, 4 & 5).

• “Whether the appellants’ brief filed by the respondents at the Lower Court out of time stipulated by the rules is competent and whether same could be deemed to have been waived by the respondent (now the Appellant) by filing respondent’s brief thereafter (Grounds 6, 7 & 8).

• “Whether an application for extension of time to file an additional record of appeal could be used to cure fundamental default in not filing the original record of appeal within time as allowed by the learned Justices of the Lower Court. (Ground 9).

• “Whether the Lower Court was right in holding that the award of special damage was wrong for not being supported with valuation report notwithstanding the uncontradicted affidavit evidence supported with exhibits showing items damaged and invoices submitted by experts in the field. (Grounds 17 & 18).

• “Whether it is not the duty of a government agency like the respondents to prove beyond reasonable doubt that illegal arms allegedly recovered from the house of a citizen was as alleged more so when apart from the video recordings they made there, the respondents also made away with CCTV in the house. (Ground 15).

• “Whether the assessment of aggravated and/or exemplary damages by the learned trial judge is unilateral and/or irrational and not in compliance with laid down rules for assessing same. (Ground 16).”

Read also:

BREAKING: Magistrate’s Court orders arrest of VeryDarkMan over alleged defamation of Mercy Chinwo