The case we are about to gist you actually happened. We are only paraphrasing it for easy understanding and consumption by our readers. To read the judgment proper, this is the suit no: FCT/HC/CV/2393/19 – Osimibibra Warmate V. Senator Elisha Ishaku Abbo

Introduction

It is the general belief of people that once a person of political standing in Nigeria does something against an average citizen, then there is no recourse for that average citizen in court but we will see in this case that things went far beyond the general belief of people.

The Gist of the Matter

Sometime in 2019, an incident happened at Banex Plaza in Wuse 2, Abuja between a lady and a sitting Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (at the time). The video which captured the violent altercation was released to the public and it was the talk of the week. 

On the 11^th of May, 2019, the Applicant* (Ms. Osimibibra Warmate) went into the New Banex Plaza, Wuse II, Abuja visit her friend’s shop. Not long after, the Respondent* (Senator Elisha Ishaku Abbo) arrived at the same shop with three women.

Ms. Warmate concluded her business at the shop and left but after realising that she forgot her handbag, went back into the shop to collect it. When Ms. Warmate got back into the shop, she noticed that her friend and the Senator were in a heated argument because one of the women with the Senator had vomited in the shop.

Once Ms. Warmate noticed that the Senator was advancing towards her friend in an aggressive manner, she tried to step in in order to calm the situation by telling the Senator to calm down and that her friend is a lady and somebody’s wife.

The Senator, obviously agitated and annoyed by Ms. Warmate’s statement, then unleashed a barrage of slaps on Ms. Warmate while also calling her stupid for interfering in a matter that did not concern her. He also pulled her hair and ordered the policeman to arrest her saying that he would make an example of her.

Ms. Warmate’s Claims before the High Court of the FCT

Aggrieved by the actions of the Senator, Ms Warmate in 2020 filed a case against the Senator at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (F.C.T.), Abuja in order to enforce her fundamental human rights that was infringed on by the Senator.

Ms. Warmate claimed that by beating her up and dragging her in a public place, the Senator has infringed on her Fundamental Right to Dignity of Human Person as enshrined in Section 34 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), hereinafter, “CFRN” because his actions amounts to degrading treatment of her person. She also showed the court a diagnosis report from an eye clinic stating that she had severe iritis on her right eye caused by blunt force trauma she had received from the Senator.

She therefore made the following claims, amongst others, through her Solicitors;

1. The sum of N250,000,000.00 (Two Hundred and Fifty Million Naira) as General Damages*.
2. The sum of N50,000,000.00 (Fifty Million Naira) as Punitive/ exemplary damages*.
3. The Court to ORDER the Senator to publicly apologise to her via newspaper publication.
4. The Court to DECLARE that the actions of the Senator amount to infringement of her fundamental right

What the Senator Argued

The Senator, through his lawyer tried to get the matter struck out/thrown away by the Court at first by filing a Preliminary Objection* and argued that the Court does not have jurisdiction/power/authority to hear/entertain the matter and that the matter/case was not properly filed in accordance with the relevant rules and laws.

However, Ms. Warmate’s lawyer responded to that application and counter argued that the High Court of the FCT has jurisdiction to determine/decide the matter and also that the matter was filed in accordance with the relevant rules.

The Court in its Ruling/Decision on the Preliminary Objection considered both arguments and also looked at the case filed by Ms. Warmate in order to determine whether it was properly filed and whether the Court is vested with the requisite jurisdiction to hear and decide the matter. The Court in its well-considered Ruling held that the Court is vested with the authority to determine the matter on its merit, thereby, discountenancing the arguments that was put forward by the Senator. Having considered that, the Court proceeded to look at the case presented before it by Ms. Warmate.

What the High Court, FCT Granted

Despite the fact that the Senator vehemently opposed his liability and argued in opposition to the claims of Ms. Warmates, the Court in its well-considered Ruling delivered on the 28^th day of September, 2020 found out that Ms. Warmate’s claim against the Senator is justified and that the Senator was liable for infringing Ms. Warmate’s fundamental right by his degrading actions.

The Senator’s Appeal

Dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court, Senator Abbo appealed the Ruling/Judgment to the Court of Appeal in order to set aside the Ruling of the FCT High Court and to free himself from the obligation to apologise to Ms. Warmate and to pay her the sum of N50,000.000.00 as ordered by the FCT High Court.

Upon filing the Appeal, the Appeal was registered as Appeal No. CA/ABJ/945/2020. Ms. Warmate filed her response through her lawyers in arguing that the decision of the High Court of the F.C.T. was just, right and is in tune with the law.

The Decision of the Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division delivered its judgment in the said Appeal in August 2023. The Court of Appeal by a panel of three members, unanimously decided the Appeal and held that the Appeal filed by Senator Abbo does not have any merit, therefore, the judgment of the High Court of the F.C.T. still stands and was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal went further to award an additional sum of N500,000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira) only as damages against the Senator in favour of Ms. Warmate in addition to the previous reliefs declared and ordered by the F.C.T. High Court bringing the total sum to be paid to Ms. Warmate to N50,500,000.00 (Fifty Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira) only.

In delivering the lead judgment of the Court of Appeal, Justice Danlami Senchi, J.C.A. held that the actions (slapping, pulling her hair and dragging her out of the shop in public) of the Senator violated Ms. Warmate’s fundamental right to human dignity. The Court described the Senator’s conduct as: 

“sufficiently outrageous … especially that the Appellant is an elected Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Conclusion

It is pertinent to state that Senator Elisha Abbo was the Senator representing Adamawa North Senatorial District at the time he assaulted Ms. Warmate; at the time Ruling/Judgment was delivered by the High Court of the F.C.T.; and he was also a Senator at the time the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment. This goes ahead to prove one single point, which is, the Rule of Law prevails.

It does not matter one’s influence, whether you are a Lawmaker or a Receptionist or Cashier at a shop, the Rule of Law prevails and one’s influence, power or wealth cannot tilt the scale of justice, so far as that person does not stand on the side of the law. Ms. Warmate won at the High Court and also at the Court of Appeal while the Distinguished Senator lost in both Courts. 

With this piece of ours, we hope that it will revive whatever hope that the common man lost with the Nigerian Judiciary. Thank you for reading and we hope you will come back soon for more gist.

Glossary

“Applicant” applies to a person who files a petition or makes an application; the petitioner; or the person who is applying for a legal remedy to a problem.

“General Damages” they are primarily applicable in personal injury cases. They compensate an injured individual for non-monetary damages that are incurred in a personal injury claim.

“Preliminary Objection” this means a legal argument made at the beginning of a case that, if accepted, would stop the case from moving forward. For example, if someone argues that the court doesn’t have the power to hear the case, that would be a preliminary objection.

“Punitive/ Exemplary damages” are damages assessed in order to punish the defendant for outrageous conduct and/or to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit.

“Respondent” This is a person, group, body or organization who responds to an appeal which has been brought before the Court by the Applicant.