ENDSARS: 29 states, 360 panelists, other figures released on panel progress

Between late October and December 15 the judicial panels set up across Nigeria to investigate police brutality have received no fewer than 2500 petitions.

According to a report by the CLEEN Foundation and NOPRIN Foundation, the petitions were received in 29 states and the FCT Abuja—where the government have set up judicial panels.

But Jigawa, Kano, Kebbi, Sokoto and Zamfara states in the North-west geopolitical zone are yet to constitute any panel. Like some northeastern states like Borno and Yobe states in the North-east geopolitical zone.

The panels were set up after the October 20 violent climax of youth protest against police brutality in Nigeria.

According to the report, the judicial panels have 360 members across the 29 states where they have been established.

The panel stats include the South-east geopolitical zone’s 89 members, highest numbers, with Anambra have 36. The northeast has 19. Bayelsa in the south-south has the least—six members.

“While we commend various state governments for engaging qualified professionals as members of the judicial panels, there have been questions on the competence and expertise of some members of the panels regarding the technical nature of the assignment,” the report noted.

In Imo, Lagos, Plateau and Nasarawa states, the panels sit on a daily basis while others sit twice or thrice weekly.

The report also noted in Plateau, Benue, Abia, Ekiti, Rivers, and Lagos states, some security actors refused to honour the panels’ summons t.

“For example, in Edo State, the Commissioner of Police has refused to honour summons from the panel of inquiry to produce a police sergeant wanted by the panel. Similarly, in Taraba State, an officer verbally threatened a petitioner who appeared before the panel to present a case against the Nigeria Police Force,” the report added.

Apart from disobedience of security agencies, other gaps the report noted include unpreparedness by both petitioners and defenders, legal technicalities instead of focusing on evidence, ending petition submission, inadequate sitting time.

The groups recommend clarification on the powers of the panel, use of technology, proper service of summonses, and accommodation of more etitioners.