When Petitions Become Weapons: How Nigerian Law Enforcement Agencies and a Flawed System Enable Injustice

In a country where the law is meant to protect the innocent and prosecute the guilty, it is disheartening to see how easily a false petition can set in motion a chain of events that ruins reputations, wastes public resources, and clogs the courts with baseless litigation. The recent ruling by Justice Mojisola Dada of the Ikeja Special Offences Court in favour of Mr. Olalekan Abdul is a stark reminder of the dangers of weaponizing the justice system.

Mr. Abdul, Managing Director and CEO of Cleanserve, along with the company’s Chairman, Mr. Azubuike Ishiekwene, spent over five years battling a 26-count charge instituted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). The charges, ranging from conspiracy and forgery to possession of fraudulent documents and theft, were based entirely on a petition filed by one Mr. Chris Ndulue—who claimed to be a director of Cleanserve without any legal standing at the Corporate Affairs Commission.

As the trial dragged on, the prosecution relied heavily on this questionable petition. It would take years of court appearances, millions in legal fees, and significant emotional and reputational tolls before the court finally acquitted both defendants on March 5, 2025. Even more telling is the court’s recent order directing the EFCC to return the $20,000 it had seized and used as an exhibit, and to lift a lien on a N10 million surety account.

How did such a flawed case make it to court in the first place?

The answer lies in a troubling culture of inadequate investigation and unchecked reliance on petitions. In this case, not only was the petitioner lacking legitimate status, but there was also evidence that an EFCC operative demanded a bribe to “kill the matter.” A sting operation – authorized by then EFCC Secretary, Ola Olukoyede – exposed the attempted compromise, but the damage was already done. The prosecution proceeded nonetheless, becoming, in the words of the defence, an act of “persecution.”

The EFCC is not alone in this. The Nigeria Police Force also faces growing criticism for acting on spurious petitions without verifying facts or motives. In many cases, individuals or business rivals simply file a petition and law enforcement swings into action—arresting suspects, freezing accounts, and disrupting lives before the truth can even surface. Justice becomes secondary to the drama of accusation.

This case highlights a systemic flaw: the ease with which individuals can manipulate Nigeria’s law enforcement agencies through petitions, often driven by personal vendettas, business rivalries, or sheer malice. Once a petition is filed, arrests can follow, assets may be seized, and innocent people may spend years in court trying to clear their names—all before any wrongdoing is proven.

Law enforcement agencies must return to the basics: thorough investigation, unbiased review of evidence, and strict adherence to legal standards before rushing matters to court. Petitions must not be taken at face value, especially when they involve complex business relationships and significant financial implications.

Beyond the courtroom drama, this case is a cautionary tale for the Nigerian justice system. If justice is to be truly served, it must not only punish the guilty but protect the innocent from malicious allegations. False petitions and premature prosecutions are not just administrative failures—they are miscarriages of justice.

Mr. Abdul and Mr. Ishiekwene may have walked free eventually, but theirs is a story of time lost, trust broken, and resources drained. For Nigeria to build a legal system that commands respect and upholds fairness, reforms must begin with accountability, professionalism, and a refusal to allow the EFCC, Nigeria Police, or any other agency to be used as instruments of personal vendetta.

Humphrey Onyanabo, popularly known as the “The Storyteller”, a society watcher and practicing journalist for about 30 years, wrote in this article.