Anthony Okolie, the businessman who was arrested and detained by the Department of State Services (DSS), for purchasing and using a SIM card which was previously owned by President Muhammadu Buhari’s daughter, Hanan, has filed a suit seeking compensation, for his troubles.
You can recall that, Okolie was arrested and detained for 10 weeks by the DSS. In the suit filed before a Federal High Court in Asaba, Delta, by his lawyer, Tope Akinyode, Anthony Okolie demanded the sum of N500 Million compensation from the DSS, Hanan and MTN.
The suit, with number FHC/ASB/CS/3/2020, is seeking an order to compel the respondents (DSS, Hanan and MTN) jointly or severally to pay the applicant the sum of Five Hundred Million Naira (N500,000,000) only as general and goaded damages for the gross and unlawful violation of the applicant’s right to acquire moveable properties, freedom of movement and self dignity.
In a supporting affirmation, the young man explained that he was arrested on 19th July, 2019, in Asaba, Delta, for using the MTN SIM card, previously used and abandoned by Hanan.
He disclosed that following his arrest, he remained in the DSS custody, bound by handcuffs, till 22nd September, 2019, as the DSS waited for Hanan, who was in school in the United Kingdom, to come and clear him but she never did. He had disclosed that while he was in the DSS custody, he wasn’t tortured, neither was he interrogated every day.
According to NAN; Okolie attached the receipt he was issued after purchasing the SIM card, as well as the SIM certificate.
The affidavit read in part, “That on 8th December, 2019, at Ogbeogonogo Market, Nebu Road, Asaba, Delta State, I purchased an MTN SIM CARD with Phone Number, 09035666662, for the sum of N1,000 only and I received a SIM pack with accompanying documents as a result as evidence of purchase receipt.
That in line with relevant regulations, I approached a kit operator of the 3rd respondent (MTN) named Jeff, who captured my biometric and registered the SIM card in my name and on my behalf.
“That in July, 2019, I visited my business associate at his residence in Asaba and saw him being taken away by officers of the 1st respondent (DSS). During the process, they obtained information from him on who he communicated with last over the phone and my associate announced that it was me.
That immediately afterwards, officers of the 1st respondent (DSS) arrested me and led me to their vehicle, asking me to keep quiet and drove me to their office in Asaba, Delta, State.
That after a while, they disclosed that my arrest was ordered by the presidency and I had to be taken to Abuja for further interrogation on which basis they drove me to Abuja by road the following day.
The young businessman maintained that he explained to the DSS how he bought the SIM card, but he was informed that the phone line, which was linked to his SIM card in question, was once used by Hanan.
Also Read; DSS Arrested and Detains Man Unlawfully For Ten Weeks After Purchasing MTN SIM Card Previously Used By President Buhari’s Daughter
They thereafter labeled me a criminal for using a phone line that previously belonged to the 2nd respondent.
Anthony Okolie alleged that because of the personality involved, his case file was tagged, ‘First Family’ and he was denied access to his lawyers.
The young businessman claimed that his mother, who was not allowed to see him, developed high blood pressure while he lost a N5 million business deal.
He added; They also disclosed to me that the president wants to see me and my case was boldly earmarked, First Family. Based on the foregoing, officers of the 1st respondent (DSS) maintained that the 2nd respondent (Hanan) must be available to clarify her allegations against me before I was allowed freedom from their facilities.
That the 2nd respondent (Hanan) was contacted several times by officers of the 1st respondent (DSS) but the 2nd respondent (Hanan) declined making herself available by claiming that she was busy with studies in the United Kingdom.
Okolie asked the court to declare that his long detention was an abuse of his fundamental human rights. He also asked the court to declare that the actions of the DSS contravened sections 35 and 34 of the 1999 Constitution.