A group of heavily armed operatives from the Lagos State Police Special Weapons and Tactics unit allegedly entered the Ondo State High Court complex in Akure and removed a defendant from the court room in the middle of proceedings.
The defendant is a 34-year-old bricklayer. He had been attending a hearing in an attempted murder matter. This arose from a long-running land dispute.
The episode has set off immediate questions about respect for judicial process. It raises concerns about inter-command jurisdiction. Additionally, the growing practice of filing parallel petitions to secure tactical advantage is questioned.
What Happened
The court was interrupted on the morning of the hearing. Witnesses say a group of men, not initially in uniform, arrived at the court premises. They seized the accused.
The sight of armed men inside a courtroom created panic among lawyers and court users. For a brief while, they feared a kidnapping.
The defence counsel rushed to alert the presiding judge and described the action as a “Gestapo style invasion.”
According to courtroom observers, the judge expressed surprise. He was unable to halt the removal once the operatives had taken the accused away.
The account given to reporters traces the presence of the operatives to a petition filed with the Lagos SWAT command.
The Accused And The Case History
The man at the centre of the storm is Ojo Ajisafe. Ajisafe has been publicly vocal for years. He alleges harassment linked to a dispute over family land in Ondo East Local Government Area.
He says a machete assault left him severely injured and that a businessman he accuses of orchestrating the violence later faced attempted murder charges in the Ondo State High Court.
Those criminal proceedings have themselves been mired in controversy. Media reporting and court records show that the prosecution objected at one point to bail but later withdrew the objection.
The state Attorney General subsequently entered a nolle prosequi to discontinue the prosecution against the main suspects. This decision drew cries of outrage from supporters of Ajisafe. They called the move an effort to shield powerful interests.
Who Was Involved
The unit implicated in the court entry is described in eyewitness accounts as the Lagos State Police SWAT. A petition was filed with the Lagos command. It alleged fresh criminality by Ajisafe. After this, the operation commenced.
The report names a senior officer, Deputy Commissioner Ayilara, as heading the SWAT office at Adeniji Adele in Lagos.
An out-of-state tactical team acted on a petition linked to a matter already before the Ondo judiciary. This is the central grievance of legal practitioners who witnessed the event.
Legal Concerns And Forum Shopping
Legal practitioners and observers at the hearing framed the incident as more than a dramatic breach of court etiquette. They are concerned that arrests inside court precincts pose a threat to the independence of the judicial process. These arrests also jeopardize the orderly conduct of judicial matters that are sub judice.
Lawyers described the development as a symptom of “forum shopping.” In this practice, parties seek multiple fora or sympathetic policing commands. They do this to secure an advantage by parallel filings or petitions.
The Inspector General of Police has recently warned against the rising practice of interstate arrests. These arrests are carried out by police commands operating outside the originating jurisdiction. This is a rebuke that underlines the sensitive constitutional and policing issues raised by the incident.
Due Process Versus Operational Policing
Police commands have statutory responsibilities to investigate alleged offences wherever they may occur. At the same time the criminal justice system relies on mutual respect between police and the judiciary.
Arresting a suspect who is physically within a court compound raises specific questions. This happens while a matter involving the same allegations is before a judge.
• Can an external command lawfully arrest a person inside another state’s court premises during ongoing proceedings? Is there a proper transfer protocol? Was it followed?
• Were warrants produced and were the court and parties formally notified?
These are procedural questions that will determine whether the operation was lawful or an overreach.
Legal sources argue that, absent clear judicial directions, police should defer to the court handling the matter. This approach avoids undermining judicial processes already in train.
Political Economy Of Land Disputes
The case sits at the intersection of Nigeria’s endemic land litigation and local power dynamics. Land disputes often involve influential local actors and politicians.
Where land is at stake, disputes can attract parallel civil claims and criminal complaints. Litigants sometimes use both routes to crowd opponents with legal and enforcement pressure.
For victims and small claimants, the result is often fatigue and a sense that the law protects the powerful.
The family of the accused bricklayer and his supporters insist the matter is essentially a civil dispute over ownership. They believe it should be resolved in court, not by extra-judicial policing.
Reactions And What Comes Next
Legal groups have urged the Ondo judiciary and the state police to clarify the circumstances of the operation. They want to ensure that the judicial process continues without interference.
Supporters of the accused are demanding transparency and impartial enforcement. The Inspector General’s recent public reminders to senior officers to respect fairness and discipline in operations are timely.
Observers say the national police leadership must address whether commands are using tactical units to pursue matters across state lines. There may be no clear legal or intercommand authority for this.
Why This Matters
The episode is a test case for the rule of law. If policing operations occur within court precincts in ways that compromise ongoing proceedings, then the judiciary’s capacity to deliver justice on the facts is weakened.
The broader risk is to public confidence. Nigeria’s courts and police remain co-dependent parts of a fragile system. Each has duties they must perform within constitutional and statutory limits.
When either side appears to overstep those limits the result is legal uncertainty and the potential erosion of civil rights.
What To Watch For
A formal statement from the Ondo State judiciary is needed. It should clarify whether the judge was notified. It should also indicate whether court orders were cited at the time of removal.
The Lagos State Police and the SWAT command need to respond. They should explain the legal basis for the arrest. Additionally, they must clarify whether warrants or transfer orders were used.
Any application to the court seeks to set aside the arrest as irregular or unlawful. It demands a return to the court to continue the hearing.
Review by police headquarters if the Inspector General deems the operation inconsistent with national policing guidelines.
Conclusion. At stake is the boundary between legitimate policing and respect for the court as the forum for dispute resolution. An out-of-state tactical unit removes a litigant from a courtroom. This action will prompt scrutiny from lawyers, judges, and civil society.
The next hearing could become the venue where those boundaries are tested and clarified. The demand for the bricklayer is simple. He says he has already bled over his inheritance. Let the courts decide. Let the law be enforced impartially.
Follow us on our broadcast channels today!
- WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VawZ8TbDDmFT1a1Syg46
- Telegram: https://t.me/atlanticpostchannel
- Facebook: https://www.messenger.com/channel/atlanticpostng
