By Okechukwu Nwanguma
The response reportedly attributed to the Delta State Police Command’s Public Relations Officer, SP Bright Edafe, regarding the allegations made by Mr. Peter Okwuokei raises more questions than it answers.
Rather than addressing the serious allegations of unlawful detention, extortion, abuse of bail procedures, retention of property, denial of medical care, and police involvement in private monetary negotiations, the police appear to have chosen a strategy of discrediting the complainant.
According to media reports, the Command’s spokesman dismissed Okwuokei’s account as someone “lying through his teeth to whip up sentiment” and disclosed that the complainant had allegedly posted a nude video of his girlfriend online.
However, even if the police version of events is accepted for the sake of argument, it still fails to answer the central questions raised by this case.
First, the complainant maintains that he did not publish or circulate the woman’s nude images online. According to his account, he merely sent the images privately to her through WhatsApp after she allegedly threatened to publish his own nude photographs. Whether that explanation is ultimately accepted or rejected is a matter for proper investigation. It does not justify dismissing the other allegations that have been made against the police.
Second, and more importantly, what is the role of the Anti-Kidnapping Unit in a dispute between intimate partners?
The Delta State Police Command owes the public an explanation as to how a disagreement between a boyfriend and girlfriend found its way to an Anti-Kidnapping Unit. Was there an allegation of kidnapping? Was there an allegation of abduction? Was there any offence falling within the mandate of an anti-kidnapping squad?
If not, why was the matter handled by such a unit in the first place?
This question becomes even more important when viewed alongside the allegations that the complainant was detained overnight, that money was demanded for his release, that his vehicle and phones continue to be held, and that police officers allegedly supervised negotiations over monetary compensation between the parties.
The public deserves answers.
If the issue involved allegations relating to intimate images, what offence was being investigated? Under what law? Why was an Anti-Kidnapping Unit deployed? What legal basis exists for the continued retention of the complainant’s vehicle after forensic extraction of data from his phones? Why were conditions allegedly imposed for the release of the vehicle that included producing a male property owner in Asaba as guarantor?
These are legitimate questions.
The police spokesman’s comments also raise concerns about confidentiality and professionalism. If the matter is under investigation, is it appropriate for the police to publicly disclose details of allegations against a suspect while ignoring allegations made against officers involved in the case?
Public relations should not become a substitute for accountability.
The fundamental issue here is not whether Mr. Okwuokei is entirely blameless. He himself admits that he struck his girlfriend during an altercation and must bear responsibility for any unlawful conduct established against him. Violence against women is unacceptable and should never be excused.
But the fact that a citizen may have committed an offence does not authorize police misconduct.
The rule of law requires that both allegations be examined. Any wrongdoing by the complainant should be investigated lawfully and fairly. Equally, allegations of extortion, abuse of bail, unlawful detention, denial of medical care, and improper retention of property by police officers must also be independently investigated.
The Nigeria Police Force has repeatedly assured Nigerians that bail is free, that extortion will not be tolerated, and that officers who abuse their powers will be held accountable. Those assurances are tested not when allegations are made against ordinary citizens but when allegations are made against police officers themselves.
The Delta State Police Command should therefore refrain from personal attacks and focus on answering the substantive questions raised by this case.
Transparency, accountability, and respect for due process are not signs of institutional weakness. They are the foundations of public trust.
The Inspector-General of Police should ensure an independent investigation into the allegations and make the findings public. Anything less risks reinforcing the perception that the police are more interested in protecting their own than in protecting the rights of citizens.
The public is watching, and the credibility of police accountability mechanisms is once again on trial.
