11. The Court notes that from the exhibits filed in the case-file by Counsel to
the Federal Republic of Nigeria, notably with reference to the Judgment of
19 May 2011 cited above, it can be observed that the reliefs sought by the
Applicant were granted when the High Court judge:
1. Declared that there was violation of Articles 34, 35, 36, 41 and 42 of the
Constitution of Nigeria;
2. Ordered that the Nigeria Police authorities must send Mr. Aliyu Tasheku
before the High Court on 23 May 2011 at 2 p.m.; and,
3. Granted him a compensation of Five Million Naira (N 5,000,000) for
unlawful detention; as evidenced below from the wording of the
operative statement of the said decision:
“It is hereby ordered that the application succeeds and accordingly, the
reliefs in the nature of declaration stated under (A) and (B) are hereby
made pointing to the unlawfulness of detention till date since the arrest
of the 2nd applicant on 18th of September, 2010.
In addition, it is hereby ordered that the respondents produce before
this court the 2nd applicants forthwith as well as to pay the 2nd
applicant, the sum of five million Naira (N 5,000,000) for unlawful
detention (…).
The respondents are to produce before this court 2 nd respondent
forthwith or specifically on Monday 23rd of May 2011 at 2 p.m.”
12. In another Judgment of 26 May 2011 from the same court, the Nigeria
Police authorities were ordered to enforce the decision to release Plaintiff on
bail as previously made by the judge of the Magistrate Court in the decision
of 28 March 2011, because, according to the High Court, the Nigeria Police
authorities had no grounds for holding Mr. Aliyu Tasheku in detention. The
operative statement of the said decision indeed states that:
“It is hereby ordered that the respondents should forthwith release the 2nd
applicant on bail as granted the terms stipulated by the Chief Magistrate
Court and which compliance has been made by the applicants; the
respondent has no basis keeping in their custodianship, 2 nd applicant;
compliance with the order of the chief magistrate court should be made
forthwith. It is so ordered.”
5