Opinion: Clarifying Authority: Why the Police and EFCC Can Only Invite, Not Summon
Emmanuel Ekwe, Esq is a Human Rights Activist

Here’s a shocking truth: Nigeria’s law enforcement agencies do not have the legal power to summon! Yes, you read that right. The Police, EFCC, and other security outfits can only invite you for questioning, but they cannot compel you to appear.
Every day, Nigerians are harassed and pressured into showing up at Police stations or Law Enforcement Offices, at their own cost and inconvenience, under the guise of a “summons”, this is a mockery of the criminal justice process.
The law is moot: only the courts—and in some cases, the National Assembly—can compel an individual to appear through a summons or warrant.

The Power to Invite, Not Summon
Here lies the key distinction: law enforcement agencies can invite an individual for questioning, but they cannot legally compel your attendance unless a court issues a summons or warrant. Invitations are voluntary, and citizens have the right to decline them without any legal consequence. This is particularly important given how invitations are often treated by law enforcement officers as though they are mandatory.
In Nigerian Bottling Co. Ltd v. COP (2004) 15 NWLR (Pt. 896) page 1, the court addressed this exact issue, ruling that law enforcement agencies cannot coerce individuals to respond to an invitation as though it were a court-issued summons. The judgment emphasized the constitutional protections that citizens enjoy and the illegality of treating an invitation as a mandatory summons.

The Constitutional Reality
The power to summon citizens is strictly vested in the Judiciary by the Nigerian Constitution and related legislation. Section 36(1) of the Nigerian Constitution guarantees every person the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a Court or Tribunal. This Constitutional provision means that only a Court has the authority to issue a summons, ensuring that citizens are protected from arbitrary interference by law enforcement agencies.
The Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, particularly Section 35, reiterates that only courts can issue a warrant or summons. While Law enforcement agencies such as the Police and the EFCC, are mandated to execute these warrants, they cannot independently issue them. This separation of powers ensures checks and balances and protects individuals from overreach by enforcement bodies. In the case of Chief Gani Fawehinmi v. Inspector-General of Police (2002) 7 NWLR (Pt. 767) 606, the court reinforced this principle by holding that law enforcement officers have no power to compel the attendance of individuals without a court order.

Legal Remedies for Citizens
For individuals who have been unlawfully summoned or coerced by law enforcement officers, several legal remedies are available. A person who has been wrongfully detained, harassed, or compelled to appear without a valid summons can seek redress through a Fundamental Rights Enforcement action under Chapter IV of the Nigerian Constitution. Such actions can be filed in court to enforce the right to personal liberty, dignity, and protection from unlawful detention.
In Ibrahim v. Osim (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt. 82) 257, the court granted damages to a plaintiff who had been unlawfully detained by the police over a civil dispute. The court held that any action taken by the police that exceeds their statutory powers exposes the offending officers and the agency to civil liability for wrongful detention, assault, or harassment.
Citizens can also seek monetary compensation for any harm suffered due to unlawful police actions. In Gwar v. Commissioner of Police (2011) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1247) 372, the court awarded damages against law enforcement officers for violating the constitutional rights of the claimant by detaining him without a proper court-issued summons.

Liability of Law Enforcement Officers
Law enforcement officers who overstep their legal boundaries by issuing illegal “summonses” expose themselves—and their agencies—to significant legal risks. Arresting or intimidating Nigerians By acting outside of their statutory authority, these officers risk being personally liable for damages, as well as tarnishing the reputation of their agencies.
The case of Abacha v. Fawehinmi (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) 228 demonstrated that even high-ranking officers are not immune from the consequences of abusing their power. The court warned that officers who unlawfully interfere with civil matters or attempt to act as arbiters of disputes between private parties could face severe legal consequences, including being sued in their personal capacity.
Beyond personal liability, agencies may also face institutional consequences, such as public condemnation or judicial review of their actions. The courts have repeatedly made clear that law enforcement officers must act within the ambit of the law or face repercussions.

Conclusion
The law in Nigeria is clear: only the courts can summon individuals and the unfortunate habit of some law enforcement agencies to usurp this power is not only an aberration, it is antidemocratic because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Citizens who are mistreated by law enforcement officers wielding illegitimate authority have the legal tools at their disposal to seek justice and hold the offenders accountable.