Court throws out 83-year-old woman's case against police in family property fight

The Lagos State High Court in Ikeja has thrown out a case filed by an 83-year-old woman, Laura Okoh. She wanted to stop the police from looking into claims related to a dispute over her late mother’s estate.

Mrs Okoh is the elder sister of veteran musician, Uche Ibeto, also known as Jigida Queen. She is famous for her 1988 highlife hit, Egwu Jigida. She has other songs like Ihu Ndi Igbo, Super Africa Mama and Nigeria In Determination.

Mrs Okoh filed this case to prevent the police from inviting or arresting her due to criminal claims made by Jigida Queen about a family property dispute.

A judgement shared with PREMIUM TIMES on Wednesday showed that the judge, Russell Adewale, said Mrs Okoh did not prove that her rights to dignity and personal freedom were violated or threatened by the police.

The judge ruled on June 17 that courts cannot stop the police from doing their job of investigating criminal complaints when there are grounds for it. "The Police have a statutory duty to investigate such complaints," Mr Adewale stated.

"An invitation to assist with an investigation, without proof of actual unlawful arrest, detention, or malicious harassment, does not constitute a violation of fundamental rights," he added.

The court rejected Mrs Okoh’s request to stop the Police Service Commission, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Nigeria Police Force Zone 2 Command, Onikan, from inviting or arresting her regarding criminal claims made by Queen Jigida.

This case, marked ID/20455MFHR/2025, was filed against the Police Service Commission, the Inspector-General of Police, the Zone 2 Police Command, and Ms Ibeto (Queen Jigida).

Mrs Okoh claimed that police officers, acting on her younger sister’s orders, harassed her with threats of arrest and detention over disagreements about their late mother’s property.

She wanted the court to declare that the actions of the police and Ms Ibeto violated her rights to dignity and personal freedom as stated in the Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Mrs Okoh also asked the court to prevent further interference with her rights and requested an apology in two national newspapers.

In support of her case, Mrs Okoh stated that she and her immediate younger sister, Ifeoma Ilodibe, were made administrators of their late mother’s estate through letters of administration granted in 2014.

She claimed that after their mother died, Ms Ibeto took cash, jewelry, and property documents belonging to the deceased. She also said Ms Ibeto later collected rental income from some of the properties.

Mrs Okoh mentioned that whenever she tried to get an account of the estate, police invitations followed, allegedly pushed by her sister.

She told the court that she had been invited to the Zone 2 Police Command at least twice and lived in constant fear of being arrested or detained.

Her lawyer, F. O Omoujiade, argued that the repeated police invitations and threats violated her constitutional rights. He urged the court to act, especially considering her age and health.

But Jigida Queen denied these claims. She said the police were investigating serious complaints she made against her and others.

In her counter-affidavit, she noted that the dispute was about a property at No. 36 Ibezim Obiajulu Street, Surulere, Lagos, which she said was not part of the estate covered by the letters of administration.

Ms Ibeto stated that she was evicted from the property in August 2025 after a court ruling. She claimed she was not aware of the proceedings despite living there for a long time.

She also alleged that further inquiries revealed fraud, forgery, impersonation, perjury, and other wrongdoings connected to the court proceedings and the sale of the property.

According to her, these findings led her and another co-administrator to ask the Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Zone 2 Command, for a criminal investigation.

She argued that Mrs Okoh had never been arrested or detained and called the suit an attempt to disrupt a police investigation.

In its ruling, the court found that the police were acting on formal complaints of fraud, forgery, impersonation, and related crimes.

Mr Adewale stated that the law allows the police to investigate criminal claims brought to them. He said courts should not interfere with such investigations unless there is clear evidence of bad faith, illegal actions, or misuse of power.

The judge noted that Mrs Okoh did not provide proof of any unlawful arrest or detention. Her affidavit mainly focused on police invitations and alleged detention of security personnel linked to the disputed property, not on any specific instance where she was unlawfully deprived of her freedom.

The court also pointed out that she did not give details like dates, duration, or circumstances of any alleged arrest or detention.

Mr Adewale remarked that the security officers mentioned were not part of the suit and that the right to personal freedom belongs to the individual affected.

Citing several appellate court rulings, the judge stressed that fundamental rights proceedings cannot block lawful criminal investigations.

"The Applicant’s application appears to be an attempt to use the fundamental rights enforcement procedure to frustrate a lawful criminal investigation, which amounts to an abuse of court process," the judge concluded.

The judge decided that the dispute involved serious allegations regarding the management of family property and that the police had the right to look into the complaints.

"The Applicant has not made out a case for the grant of any of the reliefs sought," he said before dismissing the case.