Ondo Court: Amotekun Lacks Power to Declare Citizens Wanted, Three Officers Vindicated

A major legal triumph has been recorded by three officers of the Ondo State Security Network Agency, popularly known as Amotekun Corps, following a decision by the High Court of Ondo State in Akure. The court ruled that the Corps does not possess the legal right to independently declare any Nigerian citizen a wanted person.

These officers – Abu Taiwo, Akinsipe Victor, and Ekujimi Julius – initiated consolidated suits seeking to enforce their fundamental rights. Represented by their lawyer, Tope Temokun, they brought the action against the Commandant of the Amotekun Corps, Akogun Adetunji Adeleye, and the Corps itself, disputing their suspension and the subsequent declaration of them as wanted individuals. These legal proceedings were formally cataloged under the suit numbers: HCAK/478/CIV/2025 for Abu Taiwo against Akogun Adetunji Adeleye & Anor; HCAK/475/CIV/2025 for Pius Akinsipe Temitope Victor against Akogun Adetunji Adeleye & Anor; and HCAK/479/CIV/2025 for Ekujimi Julius against Akogun Adetunji Adeleye & Anor.

During the judgments delivered on Monday, July 27, 2026, Hon. Justice A. O. Odusola, who serves as the Chief Judge of Ondo State, initially addressed a Preliminary Objection raised by the Respondents, questioning the fundamental competence of the cases. The argument put forth by the Respondents was that the affidavits supporting the applications lacked competence because the Applicants themselves did not personally depose to them. Furthermore, they asserted that the suits failed to present any justifiable cause for legal action. However, the Court completely dismissed this Preliminary Objection.

Justice Odusola determined that the affidavits were, in fact, competent, stating that when an applicant is unable to personally provide an affidavit, an individual adequately informed of the pertinent details can legitimately do so on their behalf. In this particular instance, the Court concluded that the deponent, being the spouse of one of the Applicants, possessed adequate knowledge of the facts, making her qualified to swear to the affidavits. Regarding the contention over the cause of action, the Court ruled that the Originating Processes clearly articulated a legitimate grievance concerning the protection of the Applicants' fundamental rights, thus establishing a valid basis for the legal proceedings.

Moving past the preliminary matters, the Court then focused on the core issues, pinpointing the central inquiry: whether the Ondo State Security Network Agency, or Amotekun Corps, holds the lawful power to independently declare a Nigerian citizen as wanted. The Court's unequivocal answer to this question was no. It was the Court's position that the authority to brand a citizen as wanted is strictly governed by existing laws and must adhere to specific, legally stipulated procedures. Justice Odusola specifically ruled that the Amotekun Corps lacks any statutory backing to, on its own, declare any Nigerian citizen wanted.

Furthermore, the Court highlighted that the distinguished Senior Advocate of Nigeria representing the Respondents acknowledged during the court's proceedings that no law grants any law enforcement body the power to independently declare a Nigerian citizen wanted outside the legally established protocols. As a direct consequence, the Court determined that the Respondents' declaration of the Applicants as wanted persons was executed without proper legal authority and, therefore, formally annulled it. Although the Court granted the Applicants relief concerning the unlawfully issued wanted declaration, it, however, rejected their claim for monetary damages.

This ruling is widely considered a landmark judgment, emanating directly from the chambers of the Chief Judge of Ondo State. The decision stands as a crucial judicial declaration, defining the boundaries of power for state security agencies and reaffirming the fundamental principle that any actions restricting citizens' freedom and public image must be carried out strictly within the confines of legal authority.