N8,000 debt suicide: CSOs tackle Oyo police over ‘poor’ student’s death

Lawyers and civil society organisations have condemned the handling of the case involving 30-year-old Al-Amin Mohammed, whose death by suicide three days after his release from custody has raised questions over the role of the Oyo State Police Command in a dispute that began over N8,000 debt.

The rights advocates, who spoke with Sunday PUNCH, faulted the police for allowing a civil dispute to escalate into a criminal proceeding, while questioning the command’s false allegation of assault levelled against the deceased without evidence.

Al-Amin, who combined his studies in Kwara State with aluminium fabrication to support himself and his family, was released from the Agodi Custodial Centre in Ibadan on September 14 after days in police custody and prison remand.

Three days later, on September 17, he ingested poison and died.

His family linked his death to the humiliation he suffered following his arrest, prosecution and detention.

Before his death, his father, Habeeb Mohammed, said the deceased repeatedly complained that his reputation was ruined.

A retired police officer, Isiaka Ayole, also said Al-Amin lamented that his poor family background made him suffer in the hands of the police.

The Oyo State Police Command had on Saturday, September 19, denied that Al-Amin was arrested or prosecuted over the N8,000 debt.

The command said the deceased was arrested and arraigned over alleged assault and malicious damage to property belonging to a female Point-of-Sale operator.

The Police Public Relations Officer, DSP Olayinka Ayanlade, in a statement, described reports that Al-Amin was detained over the debt as “false, unfounded and misleading.”

But a copy of the charge sheet obtained by Sunday PUNCH showed that there was no allegation of assault.

Instead, the first count alleged conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace.

The second count alleged that Al-Amin maliciously damaged an Android Itel phone.

More significantly, the particulars of the second count also referred to the N8,000 debt.

It was against this background that lawyers and civil society groups questioned the command’s handling of the matter.

A Senior Associate at Yusuf Ali & Co, Ilorin, Taofiq Olateju, said the police should not have been used to recover a private debt.

Olateju said a creditor could not lawfully take another person’s property merely because the person owed money, adding that debt recovery should be pursued through lawful civil channels.

“A creditor cannot lawfully seize another person’s property simply because the person owed money. Debt recovery should be pursued through lawful channels,” he said.

He argued that the seizure of Al-Amin’s phone should itself have been investigated rather than allowed to become part of a process through which the debt dispute escalated.

A constitutional lawyer, Musbau Saheed, also said the police could not arrest or detain a person merely because of a debt.

Saheed cited Section 32(2) of the Police Act 2020, which he said prohibited arrest solely based on a civil wrong or breach of contract.

“Debt is a civil wrong. The police have no business arresting someone over N8,000. If there was a genuine allegation of fraud, they should investigate fraud, not use criminal process to recover money,” he said.

He also questioned any demand for money as a condition for police bail, saying bail at the police station was not supposed to become a source of financial extraction from suspects or their families.

Saheed said a person subjected to unlawful arrest or detention could pursue a fundamental rights action against the police and other parties involved.

*CSO demands independent investigation*

The Executive Director of the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre, Okechukwu Nwanguma, said the circumstances surrounding Al-Amin’s arrest and prosecution raised serious questions about police conduct.

• Morning recap: Sex workers scramble as anti–HIV jab runs out, Obi, Momodu condemn El-Rufai’s prolonged detention, other top stories
• N8,000 debt suicide: How Oyo police triggered ‘poor’ student’s death
• Made in Nigeria: The story of bond, oxyurea and SCD

Nwanguma stressed that the police had the authority to investigate a genuine allegation of assault or malicious damage if evidence existed, but said such investigation should not be confused with debt recovery.

He called for an independent review of the entire matter, including the original debt, the alleged seizure of Al-Amin’s phone, the intervention of local vigilantes, the alleged property damage, the arrest and detention, the bail arrangements and the circumstances preceding his death.

The National Coordinator, Rights Advocacy and Justice, Emmanuel Alekhina, told Sunday PUNCH that the case was a textbook case of abuse of office and torture by other means.

“The Oyo State Police Command has turned itself into a debt recovery agency. How can you detain a young man overnight by vigilantes, then by police, then take him to court to be remanded in Agodi over N8,000?

“Section 35 of the 1999 Constitution says personal liberty is guaranteed. Section 32(2) of the Police Act 2020 also forbids arrest over civil debt.

“This boy died because his dignity was stripped. We are calling on the Inspector-General of Police to order the immediate arrest and dismissal of the DCO and IPO at Sanyo Division and pay compensation to the family. If police claim it was assault, why is N8,000 in the charge sheet? It is a cover-up,” Alekhina said.

He said his organisation would petition the Police Service Commission and the National Human Rights Commission on Monday.

Team Lead, Citizens Connect, a civic-tech organization that tracks unlawful detention, David Olaonipekun, said the matter showed why Small Claims Courts must be strengthened.

“This is exactly why we keep saying police stations must not become debt recovery centres. The POS operator had no right to seize his phone.

“That is self-help and conversion. The police had a duty to restore the phone and advise her to go to small claims court. Instead, they became enforcers for her.

“The fact that they allegedly asked for N100,000 bail for a boy who owed N8,000 is extortion, and it is the same criminalisation of poverty that led to #EndSARS. We have documented over 200 similar cases this year,” he said.

Similarly, the Coordinator, Youth Rights Campaign, Bayo Abubakar, said Al-Amin is a victim of a system that punishes the poor.

“A rich man’s son owing N8,000 will never see Agodi. He was shamed before his community, locked up with criminals. He told his father, ‘They ruined my reputation.’ In Nigeria, reputation is life for a young artisan.

“We demand an independent coroner inquest and that the CP Oyo must publish the outcome of his discreet investigation,” he said.

A human rights activist, Bayo Adelani, said the documentary evidence raised questions that the police command should answer.

Adelani specifically questioned why the command denied that the N8,000 featured in the criminal case when the amount appeared in the particulars of the second count.

“The police should explain why the N8,000 appeared in Count II of the charge sheet, while the command described the allegation as assault rather than conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace,” he said.

He also questioned the discrepancy between the property identified in the police statement and the charge sheet.

“The police have questions to answer. Why the contradictions? Why was a matter that the DPO himself said could be settled hurriedly taken to court within 12 hours?” Adelani asked.

He also called for an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the involvement of vigilantes in the arrest and transfer of Al-Amin to the police station.

The retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ayole, who helped the family secure Al-Amin’s bail from custody, also called for an independent investigation.

“When I went to bail him from Agodi, the boy told me categorically that he suffered prison remand because he was poor. I tried to disabuse his mind that he should not see it like that,” he said.

Ayole questioned why the dispute was allowed to progress to court rather than being resolved at an earlier stage.

When contacted, the Force Public Relations Officer, CSP Anietie Iniedu, declined to comment on the matter.

Calls to his phone were unanswered, while messages sent to his WhatsApp line had not been responded to as of the time of filing this report.