John Aikpokpo-Martins has filed an application at the Federal High Court, Warri, seeking an order committing the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, CSP Benjamin Hundeyin (Force Public Relations Officer), and AIG Emmanuel Aina (Director of Legal Services) to prison for allegedly disobeying a court order restraining the enforcement of tinted glass permits.
In the suit marked FHC/WR/CS/103/2025, filed on behalf of himself and tinted car owners in Nigeria, Aikpokpo-Martins alleges that the police officials are in contempt of court for announcing the resumption of tinted glass permit enforcement despite a subsisting court order.
According to the application filed by Kunle Edun, SAN, and his team, the Federal High Court on October 3, 2025, granted an order to maintain the status quo, which implies that the defendants shall not take further action on and/or give effect to the directives to execute the tinted glass permit pending the hearing of the interlocutory application.
The applicant states in an affidavit sworn on December 18, 2025, that following the court order, there was a meeting sometime in October 2025 between the Inspector General of Police, his management team, and the Nigerian Bar Association led by NBA President Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN.
“After a mutual review of the facts and the law and in the light of the order of this Honourable Court made on the 3rd day of October, 2025, the 1st contemnor, in the presence of the 2nd and 3rd contemnors conceded to halt the operation of the policy in deference to the said order of court. The 1st defendant through the 2nd contemnor caused a public statement to be issued to that effect halting the operation of the policy,” the affidavit states.
However, the applicant alleges that on December 15, 2025, the police issued a press statement announcing plans to resume enforcement of the tinted glass permit policy on January 2, 2026.
“That suddenly, the 1st defendant through the office of the 2nd contemnor caused a press statement to be published on his aforementioned twitter handle of the directive of the 1st defendant, that the police will start enforcing the tinted permit policy, the subject matter of this suit,” the affidavit reads.
A copy of the Nigeria Police Force’s Twitter/X statement dated December 15, 2025, was attached to the application as exhibit.
The applicant describes the actions of the contemnors as “highly vindictive, wicked, obnoxious, lacking in bona fide and utterly shameful. It is an affront to the rule of law, to the majesty of the Honourable Court and contemptuous of the court.”
“The actions of the contemnors, particularly of the 2nd contemnor by making the publication of the said press release/statement is wicked, gross vindictive, vexatious and contemptuous of this court. The actions of the defendant working through the office of the 2nd and 3rd contemnors are meant to overawe the court, stultify and destroy the res and/or render nugatory the subject matter of this suit and therefore liable to be set aside ab initio,” the application states.
The applicant is seeking the following orders:
In a detailed written address supporting the application, Aikpokpo-Martins’ lawyers cited Section 287(3) of the 1999 Constitution, which provides that “decisions of the Federal High Court or of a High Court and of any other court established by this constitution or any other law shall be enforced in any part of the Federation by all authorities and persons.”
The application cited several Supreme Court and Court of Appeal decisions emphasizing the need for courts to protect their authority and dignity from contempt.
Quoting from the case of ADEJUGBE V. ADULOJU (2022)3 NWLR 1816, the lawyers stated: “Every court has the inherent duty to protect its authority and its processes from being disregarded and frustrated by any person particularly parties in cases before it. When such an affront and contempt arises, it must be promptly addressed before any further step is taken in the proceedings.”
The application also invoked the principle of lis pendis, citing the case of OKOMU OIL PALM CO. V. TAJUDEEN (2016)3 NWLR PART 1499, which held that:
“It is not permissible for one of the parties to take any step during the pendency of the suit which may have the effect of foisting upon the court a situation of complete helplessness. Both parties are expected to await the result of the litigation and the appropriate order of court before acting any further.”
The lawyers argued that “once a party is aware of a pending court process, and whether the court has not given a specific injunctive order, parties are bound to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the court process. They should, on no account resort to self-help.”
Citing ODEGBO & ORS v. MOFUNANYA & ORS (2016) LPELR-42107(CA), the application argues that the essence of a mandatory injunction “is that it is a restorative order usually invoked by the Court and targeted at a party who is disrespectful to the rule of law so that what that party has done would be undone, such that the parties to the action, would be restored to the status quo ante bellum.”
The applicant urges the court to “strike down the letter of the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent dated the 29/11/2024” and grant the application.
The application, dated December 19, 2025, and filed by Kunle Edun (SAN) & Partners, includes Olukunle Ogheneovo Edun, SAN, Roli Owhojeta Esq., Alfred Ogunli Esq., and Faith Anigboro Esq. as claimants’ counsel.
