A federal high court in Delta State has ruled that Nigerians can record police officers carrying out stop-and-search operations in public spaces.
Hyeladzira Nganjiwa, the presiding judge, delivered the ruling on Tuesday following the enforcement of a fundamental rights suit filed by Maxwell Nosakhare Uwaifo, a lawyer.
The suit also sought a judicial pronouncement on the legality of police officers conducting stop-and-search operations without visible name tags and force numbers, as well as the right of citizens to record them.
Other respondents in the case include the inspector-general of police, the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), the Police Service Commission (PSC), and the attorney-general of the federation (AGF).
In a statement, Uwaifo said the judge made “far-reaching pronouncements on police accountability and citizens’ constitutional rights”.
He added that the court ruled that “anonymous policing is unconstitutional”.
The Suit
The lawyer told the court he filed the case following an encounter with police officers at the Sapele roundabout while travelling from Benin to Warri on May 10, 2025.
He said the officers stopped him and began questioning him in an aggressive manner.
Uwaifo stated that upon noticing behaviour suggesting extortion or harassment, he brought out his phone to record the interaction.
“Immediately I brought out my phone, one of the men, dressed in black and appearing to be a police officer, threatened to arrest me and demanded that I put my phone away,” the lawyer said.
“They did not wear any name tags, nor did they introduce themselves. They also made no effort to disclose their identity or provide a reason for their conduct.
“The vehicle they used was a Toyota Sienna, painted black, with no police inscription, no plate number, and no markings whatsoever to identify it as a police vehicle.
“The entire interaction was intimidating, and the men created a hostile atmosphere. I could not confidently ask questions or even continue to record for fear that I would be manhandled or unlawfully detained.
“I had to comply in fear, and leave quietly because I did not want to risk being physically assaulted, arrested, or having my phone forcefully taken from me.
“Due to this fear and their threatening demeanor, I could not gather any concrete evidence, and I also could not record the video or identify them clearly due to the absence of name tags and their use of an unmarked vehicle.
“I have heard and seen many similar instances where police officers intimidate, harass, and even assault Nigerians simply for recording them or questioning their unlawful acts at checkpoints.”
In the suit, Uwaifo asked the court to declare that Nigerians are entitled, under section 39 of the 1999 constitution, to freely express themselves, including recording the conduct of law enforcement agents performing public duties in public spaces.
He also requested the court to declare it unlawful for police officers to seize devices, arrest, or threaten individuals for recording their activities in public.
He further sought a declaration that police officers conducting patrols, stop-and-search operations, and other public engagements without uniforms displaying their names and force numbers is unconstitutional and illegal.
The reliefs sought also included orders restraining such practices, mandating the issuance of clear directives and training guidelines to officers affirming the public’s right to record police activities, and requiring disciplinary action against erring officers.
Uwaifo additionally sought N80,000,000 as general and exemplary damages for alleged violations of his rights and those of the public.
The police were not represented in court, although the AGF was represented by Babatunde Ajajogun and D.O. Tarfa.
The Judgment
Nganjiwa held that Nigerians have the constitutional right to record police officers performing their duties in public.
The judge ruled that officers must wear visible name tags and display force numbers or proper identification during public operations.
The court also held that it is unlawful for police to harass, intimidate, arrest, or seize devices from citizens for recording them.
The court awarded N5,000,000 as damages for the violation of fundamental rights and N2,000,000 as litigation costs.