THE POLICE WILL NEVER DISRESPECT THE JUDICIARY – SP HUNDEYIN
• Debunks Media Reports on Lagos Magistrate Locked Up Inside Cell
The Nigeria Police, Lagos State Command has refuted the claims made in a news report not NAOSNP that one of its Area Commanders forcefully detained a magistrate who had come for cell inspection. The incident which was said to happen in Area D Command did not happen, the Police unequivocally rejected.
In a press statement e-signed and released to the National Association of Online Security News Publishers, NAOSNP by the Command’s Spokesperson, SP Benjamin Hundeyin quoted: ‘The Lagos State Police Command is aware of a June 02, 2022 news story by one Michael Akintola of PM Express titled ‘How Area Commander Locked Up Lagos Magistrate Inside Cell at Area D Command.’ The Command wishes to state clearly that the story is nothing but fiction.’
‘At no time did the Area Commander detain or attempt to detain the magistrate, who was at the Area Command for Cell Inspection exercise. The Police will never engage in such disrespect to the Judiciary’, National Association of Online Security News Publishers, NAOSNP gathered.
SP Hundeyin stressed: ‘The Lagos State Police Command did the needful and contacted the judiciary. The Lagos State Judiciary confirmed that there was no such thing and neither was the magistrate prevented from carrying out her Cell Inspection exercise. We hereby state it unequivocally that any attempt to cause disaffection between the Police and the Judiciary will be fiercely resisted. We remain worthy partners in the justice sector.’
‘The Lagos State Police Command enjoins Lagosians to disregard the story as officers and men under the stewardship of CP Abiodun Alabi, fdc will continue to be professional and uphold the rule of law at all times’, NAOSNP gathered from the press release.
The Police PRO then advised against media sensationalism, ‘The writer referring to a serving magistrate as ‘the innocent woman’ says a lot about his objectivity/bias and contrived efforts at sensationalism.
Also, it is suspicious that the writer could not provide the name of the magistrate, who is a public officer. It is equally suspicious that the writer made no attempt to contact the judiciary to verify the purported detention.’
