Title: “Land Dispute Drama: Adamawa Ministry and Police Clash Over Alleged Violation of 2012 Consent Judgment”
In a protracted 14-year land dispute, the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) and the Adamawa State Ministry of Land and Survey, along with seven other parties, are embroiled in a bitter feud, challenging the harmony and mutual respect established by a 2012 consent judgment.
The conflict, initiated in 2010 by the NPF and two others against Mr. Alems and seven others, revolves around allegations of trespassing on police land. Despite a consent judgment delivered by late Justice Bobbo Ardo in 2012, the dispute remains unresolved, with accusations flying between the parties.
The defense counsel, Konleganyiga Urbanus Jonathan, representing Mr. Alems and the ministry, accuses the police of haughtiness and coercion, claiming that the police continued development on the disputed land without waiting for the court’s final decision, violating the rule of law.
Justice Bobbo Umar had suggested arbitration, leading to the consent judgment, where all parties agreed on terms. However, Jonathan laments that the police have been evasive and uncooperative since the judgment was delivered in 2012.
Efforts by the Ministry of Land and Survey to initiate demarcation and allow each party to take possession based on the consent judgment have been met with resistance. The police allegedly deployed armed personnel, obstructing the court officials and escalating tensions.
The police, on the other hand, vehemently claim ownership of the land, emphasizing their commitment to defending it against any encroachment. The legal battle is still pending in a higher court, and the police assert their right to protect the property until a final judgment is reached.
Read Also: Gen. Danjuma Coronation Plan Sparks Outrage; Kuteb Leaders Cry Foul: “Our Throne Not for Sale!”
One defendant, who remains anonymous, criticizes the police for appealing a judgment delivered in 2012, deeming it unconstitutional. The clash continues, highlighting a complex legal entanglement with no resolution in sight.
Documents obtained during the investigation reveal the terms of the 2012 consent judgment, outlining agreements on land allocation, revocation of rights, and possession. Despite the clear terms, the dispute persists, casting a shadow over the potential for an amicable resolution to this enduring conflict.
