“Contract Dispute Is Not A Criminal Case” — Court Awards ₦15m Against KYC Inter Project Ltd, MD, Police Officers For Using Criminal Machinery In Dispute Before Court, Arbitration

The Federal High Court, Abuja, recently delivered a significant judgment, awarding N15 million in damages against KYC Inter Project Limited, its Managing Director Mr. Michael Ayuba Auta, and officers of the Nigeria Police Force. The court found that the respondents violated the constitutional rights of businessman Alhaji Sanusi Badamasi Nababa by deploying criminal machinery in a purely civil contract dispute concerning a land transaction in Guzape, Abuja. This ruling unequivocally reaffirms the principle that the police are not debt collectors and should not interfere in civil or contractual matters, especially when such disputes are already subject to civil litigation or arbitration. The judgment serves as a strong deterrent against the abuse of state power and underscores the judiciary’s commitment to protecting fundamental human rights.

This landmark decision serves as a crucial reminder to legal practitioners and the public alike that the machinery of criminal justice is not a tool for debt recovery or the enforcement of civil obligations. The judgment reinforces the sanctity of civil and arbitral processes, emphasizing that parties to a contract dispute must pursue their remedies through appropriate civil channels. The court's firm stance sends a clear message that such abuses of power will not be tolerated and will attract significant financial penalties, thereby upholding the rule of law and protecting the fundamental rights of citizens against arbitrary state action and private overreach.

Nigerian courts have consistently reiterated that the police are not debt recovery agents and have no business dabbling into purely civil or contractual disputes. This principle has been affirmed in a plethora of cases, including *McLaren v. Jennings* (2003) FWLR (Pt 154) 528, where the Court of Appeal held it unlawful for the police to arrest and detain an appellant for debt collection. Similarly, in *NWADIUGWU v. IGP & ORS* (2015) LPELR-26027(CA), the appellate court clarified that police duties, as enumerated in the Police Act, do not include the settlement of disputes or collection of debts. The Supreme Court, in *Kure v C.O.P.* (2020) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1729) 296, reinforced this position, warning against the misuse of criminal law machinery for civil reliefs. These legal precedents form the bedrock against which the actions of KYC Inter Project Limited, its MD, and the police officers were judged.

The underlying land transaction dispute, which was reportedly before a court or arbitration, underscores the malicious intent behind involving the police. Such actions are often calculated to intimidate and coerce a party into acceding to demands outside the legitimate civil process. The court's judgment rightly condemned this practice, emphasizing that the existence of a civil or arbitral process precludes the use of criminal investigative powers to resolve what are essentially private contractual disagreements. The Federal High Court, by holding both the private company, its MD, and the police officers jointly and severally liable, reinforced the principle that both instigators and facilitators of such abuses will be held accountable. This sends a strong signal that private citizens who enlist the police for civil matters are equally culpable for any resulting rights violations.

Practitioners should remain vigilant in educating clients on the proper channels for dispute resolution—civil litigation or arbitration—and be prepared to vigorously defend the fundamental rights of individuals subjected to unlawful arrest, detention, or harassment stemming from civil disagreements. This ruling serves as a powerful precedent, encouraging greater adherence to due process and fostering a legal environment where civil disputes are resolved through civil means, thereby strengthening public confidence in the judiciary and upholding the integrity of the Nigerian legal system. What to watch for is a potential increase in fundamental rights enforcement actions against both law enforcement and private citizens who continue to disregard this well-established legal principle.