Court affirms ciitizens’ right to record police on duty

Delivering the judgement on Tuesday in a suit marked FHC/WR/CS/87/2025, the judge, H. A. Nganjiwa, said police officers must wear visible name tags, display their force numbers, and refrain from harassing, intimidating, arresting, or confiscating devices from citizens who record their actions.

The court awarded the applicant, Maxwell Uwaifo, N5 million for the violation of his fundamental rights and an additional N2 million for litigation costs.

All of the applicant’s prayers were granted, reinforcing the public’s right to document police activities in public spaces without fear of reprisal.

The suit was filed as a public interest litigation by Mr Uwaifo, challenging the legality of police stop-and-search operations conducted without officers displaying name tags or force numbers.

The suit named the Inspector-General of Police, the Nigeria Police Force, the Police Service Commission, and the Attorney-General of the Federation as respondents.

Filed under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009, and relevant sections of the Nigerian constitution, the suit also cited provisions including Sections 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, and 46, as well as Articles 5, 6, 7, 9, and 11 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

In the originating summons, the applicant asked the court to determine whether citizens can legally record police officers and whether harassment or arrest for recording constitutes a violation of fundamental rights.

Mr Uwaifo sought declarations affirming that Nigerians are entitled under Section 39 of the Constitution to freely express themselves, including recording and publishing matters of public interest, particularly police conduct in public.

He asked the court to declare that any attempt by officers of the Nigeria Police Force to prevent or punish such recording—whether through threats of arrest, harassment, intimidation, or seizure of devices—is unconstitutional, unlawful, and a violation of fundamental rights.

He also prayed for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Respondents, their officers, agents, privies, or anyone acting under their instructions from harassing, intimidating, threatening, arresting, or otherwise infringing upon the rights of the applicant or any Nigerian citizen in relation to recording police officers on duty in public.

Additionally, Mr Uwaifo sought a declaration that police officers conducting patrols, stop-and-search operations, and other public interactions without wearing uniforms that visibly display their names and force numbers act unconstitutionally and illegally.

He further prayed for an injunction restraining the Respondents and their agents from carrying out stop-and-search or checkpoint operations without ensuring that all operatives wear full uniforms bearing their names and force numbers.

The applicant asked the court to direct the Police Service Commission to issue clear guidelines and training for all officers of the Nigeria Police Force, affirming the public’s right to record and report police activities in public spaces, including at checkpoints and during stop-and-search operations.

He also requested that relevant authorities discipline any officer found to have acted in breach of these constitutional rights, and that the Police Service Commission issue circulars or directives mandating all officers on public duties to wear full uniforms with proper identification while initiating disciplinary proceedings against defaulters.

He prayed for an award of N80,000,000 as general and exemplary damages against the Respondents for repeated violations of the rights of himself and members of the public, as well as any further orders the court may deem just and appropriate.

The judge granted all of the applicant’s prayers.

In his affidavit, Mr Uwaifo recounted multiple incidents in which he and other citizens were stopped by officers operating from unmarked vehicles, dressed in incomplete uniforms, and refusing to identify themselves.

On 10 May 2025, while travelling from Benin to Warri, he said he was blocked by armed officers at a checkpoint, questioned aggressively without reasonable suspicion, and threatened with arrest when he attempted to record the interaction.

According to him, a similar encounter occurred in June 2025 near Effurun Roundabout in Warri.

Mr Uwaifo argued that such anonymous policing fosters impunity, enabling extortion, assault, and unlawful detention.

He maintained that these practices violate citizens’ rights to dignity, personal liberty, and freedom of expression, as guaranteed under the Constitution, the Police Act 2020, and global democratic policing standards.

Citing Section 66(1) of the Police Act, 2020, he stressed that officers must display name tags and force numbers.

He noted that no law criminalises recording public officials performing official duties and referenced rulings in I.G.P. v. Ubah (2014) and Fawehinmi v. I.G.P. (2000) to support public interest litigation.

In his reaction to the judgment,  Mr Uwaifo said the ruling has significant implications for policing standards, civil liberties, and public accountability across Nigeria.

“The court made far-reaching pronouncements on police accountability and citizens’ constitutional rights.”