On Tuesday, during the proceedings at the Federal Capital Territory High Court, the Department of State Services (DSS) raised concerns about the possibility of Godwin Emefiele, the suspended Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, escaping the country if granted bail. The DSS presented this argument, emphasizing the potential flight risk posed by Emefiele. The court listened to the DSS’s submission, considering it as part of the ongoing legal case involving the suspended governor. In addition to contesting his detention by the Department of State Services (DSS), the former head of the apex bank, Godwin Emefiele, is also expressing grievances over being denied access to his family members and legal representation. Amid the ongoing legal proceedings, Emefiele is challenging these restrictions, asserting his right to communicate with his loved ones and seek legal counsel. The issue of limited visitation and legal assistance has become an integral part of his defense as he seeks to address the circumstances surrounding his detention. on Saturday, June 10, 2023, President Bola Tinubu suspended Godwin Emefiele from his position as the Central Bank of Nigeria Governor. Following his suspension, Emefiele was subsequently detained by the Department of State Services (DSS). The circumstances surrounding his suspension and subsequent detention have raised significant attention and sparked legal proceedings to address the matter.During the resumption of the hearing on Tuesday, the Department of State Services (DSS) and the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) presented separate counter-affidavits in response to a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by the suspended Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) chief. In their respective counter-affidavits, the DSS and OAGF put forth their arguments and positions concerning the case. The court considered these submissions as part of the ongoing legal proceedings, which aim to address the fundamental rights of the suspended CBN chief and determine the appropriate course of action. In its affidavit, the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) refuted speculations that Godwin Emefiele, the suspended Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor, was being detained for terrorist-related offenses. The OAGF also stated that Emefiele was not being victimized due to his involvement in politics or the failed naira redesign policy. Through their affidavit, the OAGF aimed to dispel any misconceptions and clarify the reasons behind Emefiele’s detention, asserting that it was unrelated to terrorism or political matters. The affidavit played a significant role in shedding light on the motivations behind the suspended CBN governor’s detainment.According to the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF), the grounds for the arrest and detention of the applicant (Godwin Emefiele) do not include allegations of terrorism financing or fraudulent activities. In their statement, the OAGF clarified that these specific charges were not part of the basis for Emefiele’s apprehension and subsequent detention. The OAGF’s assertion aimed to address any misconceptions surrounding the motives behind Emefiele’s arrest and emphasize that the allegations against him were unrelated to terrorism financing or fraudulent activities.The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) stated that the respondents, namely the Department of State Services (DSS) and other relevant parties, have not infringed upon the suspended Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor’s right to life in any manner, emphasizing that his life is not at risk. The OAGF further asserted that the respondents did not subject the applicant to any form of judicial adjudication that would warrant allegations of denying him a fair hearing. According to the OAGF’s position, the actions taken against the applicant were within legal bounds and did not violate his fundamental rights or jeopardize his safety.The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) argued that the remand order issued by a court of competent jurisdiction justified the temporary restriction on the applicant’s right to freedom of movement. According to the OAGF, due to the existence of the remand order, there was no violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of movement. The OAGF’s assertion aimed to address concerns regarding the restriction placed on the applicant’s movement, highlighting that it was authorized by a legally valid court order, thereby justifying the temporary limitation on his freedom of movement.The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) stated that the respondents did not subject the applicant to any form of torture, emphasizing that no specific details regarding such allegations have been provided. According to the OAGF, there is no evidence or information presented to support the claim of torture inflicted upon the applicant. The OAGF’s position aimed to refute any suggestions of mistreatment and underscore that no substantiated details regarding alleged torture have been presented thus far in the case.The Department of State Services (DSS) provided its response, stating that Godwin Emefiele, the suspended Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor, was being held in accordance with an order from a competent court. The DSS further specified that Emefiele was arrested based on reasonable suspicion of committing various offenses, including criminal breach of trust, incitement to violence, criminal misappropriation of public funds, economic sabotage, economic crimes with national security implications, and undermining the security of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Representing the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF), Senior Advocate of Nigeria Tijani Gazal urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that Emefiele’s claim of unlawful detention was unfounded. Gazali emphasized that the suspended CBN governor’s detention was authorized by an order from an FCT Chief Magistrates Court, implying that it was legally justified.

The DSS and the OAGF’s arguments shed light on the reasons for Emefiele’s detention and highlighted the legal framework within which it was being carried out. These details were presented as part of the ongoing legal proceedings surrounding the case. During the court session, the Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) representing the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) informed the court that the OAGF, listed as the first respondent, was challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case. The SAN argued that Emefiele’s arrest and detention were administrative decisions falling within the purview of the executive branch of government. The SAN further emphasized that the jurisdiction of a court is determined by the specific relief sought by the applicant.

Following the presentation of arguments by all parties involved, Justice Hamza Muazu adjourned the proceedings until July 13, when a ruling on the matter is expected to be made. The adjournment allows the court time to consider the arguments presented and make a decision regarding the jurisdiction of the court in relation to the case.