INTRODUCTION

Before the advent of the Treasury Single Account (TSA) in 2015, the individual officers maintained separate accounts in commercial banks in their official capacities, making the execution of judgments against the Police through them expedient. However in a recent Supreme Court’s pronouncement, it was made clear that the proper parties to be sued in claims involving the Police are the Nigeria Police Force and the Police Service Commission creating a shift from individual liability to institutional liability. TSA is a bank account or a set of linked accounts through which the government transacts all its receipts and payments into the said account is remitted all revenues due to the Federation Account and the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federal Government. The Supreme Court emphasized unequivocally that Police officers as mere employees, that they do not maintain separate accounts under the TSA policy and thus cannot be held individually liable for official actions. This work focuses on the new prospect to suing the police in police-related claims in Nigeria using the recent decision of the Supreme Court in CBN V. OCHIFE & 3 ORS.[1]

 FACTS OF THE CASE

This case emerged from a judgment delivered by the the Federal High Court in Abuja on the 10^th day of October, 2018, awarding N50,000,000 (Fifty Million Naira) in damages against the Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police and the Officer In Charge of the Intelligence Response Team Special Anti-Robbery Squad. In other to enforce the payment of the judgment sum, the 1^st Respondent commenced a Garnishee Proceedings against the Appellant, seeking to attach the funds in the accounts of the judgment debtors under the Treasury Single Account (TSA) Policy. The trial Court granted a Garnishee Order Nisi on 10^th day of December, 2018 directing the Central Bank of Nigeria to attach N50,000,000 (Fifty Million) from the accounts of the judgment debtors. However, the Central Bank of Nigeria filed an affidavit to show cause stating that it did not maintain any accounts in the names of the Judgment Debtors and could not comply with the Order of the Court.

The Court of Appeal, in its judgment on the 14^th day of December, 2020 dismissed the Central Bank of Nigeria’s holding that the Affidavit to show cause was completely filed but rejecting the Central Bank of Nigeria’s denial of maintaining account for the judgment debtors. This Court invoked Section 124 of Evidence Act taking judicial notice of the Treasury Single Account Policy and concluding that the judgment debtors, being government agencies, must have accounts with the Appellant.

The Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court being dissatisfied with the Court of Appeal’s decision. In its ruling, the Supreme Court found that the lower Court’s decision was perverse and had erred in its evaluation of the evidence.

 Justice Abiru, JSC in his lead judgment emphasized that

“the 2^nd to 4^th Respondents, who are the judgment debtors are employees of the Nigeria Police Force, whose terms and conditions of service are regulated by the Police Service Commission. In other words, the Nigeria Police Force and the Police Service Commission are agencies of the Federal Government whose accounts may be domiciled with the Appellant under the Treasury Single Account (TSA) Policy of the Federal Government but definitely not the 2^nd to 4^th Respondents. The Judgment Debtors (Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police (FCT) and Officer In Charge of Special Anti Robbery Squad are not Ministries, Departments or Agencies of the Federal Government and cannot be referred to as MDAs to qualify as persons for whom the Appellant would maintain accounts under the Treasure Single Account Policy (TSA) of the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

 Also, that the 1^st Respondent failed to provide specific details of the accounts allegedly maintained by the Judgment debtors with the Appellant. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal, and dismissed the Garnishee Proceedings against the Appellant.

NEW PROSPECT TO SUING THE POLICE IN A POLICE-RELATED CLAIMS

By virtue of Section 214 -215 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and Section 7 of the Police Act, the Police is to be sued through the Inspector General of Police or the Commissioner of Police. However in the above-mentioned case, the Nigeria Police Force may be vicariously liable for the actions of the officers of the Nigeria Police Force.

Section 214 of the  1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)

(1) There shall be a police force for Nigeria, which shall be known as the Nigeria Police Force, and subject to the provisions of this section no other police force shall be established for the Federation or any part thereof.

(2) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution –

(a) the Nigeria Police Force shall be organised and administered in accordance with such provisions as may be prescribed by an act of the National Assembly;

(b) the members of the Nigeria Police shall have such powers and duties as maybe conferred upon them by law;

(c) the National Assembly may make provisions for branches of the Nigeria Police Force forming part of the armed forces of the Federation or for the protection of harbours, waterways, railways and air fields.

Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)

(1) There shall be –

(a) an Inspector-General of Police who, subject to section 216(2) of this Constitution shall be appointed by the President on the advice of the Nigeria Police Council from among serving members of the Nigeria Police Force;

(b) a Commissioner of Police for each state of the Federation who shall be appointed by the Police Service Commission.

(2) The Nigeria Police Force shall be under the command of the Inspector-General of Police and contingents of the Nigeria Police Force stationed in a state shall, subject to the authority of the Inspector-General of Police, be under the command of the Commissioner of Police of that state.

Section 7(1) of the Police Act[2]

• The Inspector-General of Police is the head of the Nigeria Police Force and shall exercise full command and operational control over the Police and all its departments and units.

Section 12 (1) of the Police Act[3]

• The Police Service Commission shall appoint such numbers of Commissioners of Police as are required for the efficient performance of the functions of the Police Force.
• The Police Service Commission shall, from among the Commissioners of Police appointed under subsection (1), assign a Commissioner of Police to a State or to the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. 

The Nigeria Police Force is a person (non-living but legally constructed) created by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999. It is created for internal security, protection of lives, property and other human rights. It is headed by the Inspector General of Police and to carry out the functions and duties that are provided in the Nigeria Police Act of 2020. It is the Nigeria Police Force that organises some Nigerians, train them and declare them Police Officers. It is the Nigeria Police Force that is responsible for the welfare, operations, credit and discredits of the police officers in Nigeria. Thus, every Police Officer is a representative of the Nigeria Police Force. You cannot separate Police Officers from the Nigeria Police Force, they are like corn and pop-corn. So, the actions of a police officer is unarguably the actions of the Nigeria Police Force. 

Nigeria Police Force is vicariously liable for the actions of police officers. A master is responsible for the actions and inactions of his servant. With endless nationwide transfer of police officers, lack of records and evasion of court processes/documents by police officers, makes holding the Nigeria Police Force liable better. For quick response, enforcement of judgment such as Garnishee proceeding and Payment of Compensation, it is advisable to sue the Nigeria Police Force or the Police Service Commission. The terms and conditions of the service of the employees of the Nigeria Police Force is regulated by the Police Service Commission. In other words, the Nigeria Police Force and Police Service Commission are agencies of the Federal Government whose accounts may be domiciled with the Bank and not the police officials who are mere employees. Finally, the decision of the Supreme Court in CBN V. OCHIFE & 3 ORS has created a new framework for institutional liability over individual liability thereby enhancing the efficiency of justice delivery in police-related claims in Nigeria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. It is my opinion that for execution of monetary judgment through a Garnishee proceedings, police-related claims must be initiated against the accounts held by the Nigeria Police Force or Police Service Commission under the Treasure Single Account (TSA) Policy rather than attaching individual accounts.
2. It is my opinion that to avoid unenforceable judgments, litigants with fresh suits or pending cases against individual officers should seek the leave of the Court to amend their processes in a police-related claims to include the proper parties such as the Nigeria Police Force or the Police Service Commission.
3. It is also important to note that Treasure Single Account is a bank account or a set of linked accounts through which the government transacts all its receipts and payments into the said account is remitted all revenues due to the Federation Account and the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federal Government. It is a public accounting system, the purpose of which is to manage the government revenue and ensure that the payments come through the Consolidated Revenue Account (CRA) of the CBN (Central Bank of Nigeria). It covers all of the existing Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs). The Treasury Single Accounts (TSA) policy of the Federal Government of Nigeria (the Nigerian police force and its affiliates and agents) being agencies of the Federal Government of Nigeria are kept and maintained by the Central Bank of Nigeria.

CONCLUSION

The decision of the Supreme Court in CBN V. OCHIFE & 3 ORS has created a new framework for institutional liability over individual liability thereby enhancing the efficiency of justice delivery in police-related claims and execution of monetary judgments. Hence, to avoid misdirected claims by litigants, the proper parties to be sued in any claim involving the Police is the Nigeria Police Force or the Police Service Commission.

---

[1] (2025) LCER-51001 (SC)

[2] Nigeria Police Act 2020