Fresh concerns have emerged over the handling of an N8,000 debt dispute by the Oyo State Police Command following the death by suicide of a 30-year-old polytechnic student, Al-Amin Mohammed, days after his release from custody.
The development has triggered criticism from civil society organisations and legal practitioners, who questioned the circumstances surrounding the student’s arrest, detention and prosecution over the dispute.
According to reports, the incident began after Al-Amin allegedly obtained N23,000 in cash from a Point-of-Sale business through an arrangement involving a transfer of N15,000, with an outstanding balance of N8,000. A woman identified as Iya Ajike, an apprentice of the POS operator, allegedly took Al-Amin’s mobile phone while he was asleep after he failed to pay the outstanding amount.
The situation subsequently escalated into a confrontation when Al-Amin returned to retrieve his phone. During the ensuing struggle, an Airtel-branded device reportedly used for business was allegedly damaged.
Al-Amin was subsequently detained by a vigilante and handed over to the police at the Sanyo Police Division in Ibadan.
The police later prosecuted him. While the command maintained that the case involved allegations of assault and malicious damage to property valued at N177,000, a review of the charge sheet reportedly showed that the N8,000 debt was also included in the second count.
The student’s family alleged that police authorities demanded N100,000 for his bail before the matter was eventually taken to court. When the family could not immediately raise the money, Al-Amin was remanded at the Agodi Custodial Centre pending the fulfilment of his bail conditions.
A retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, Isiaka Ayole, who reportedly assisted in securing Al-Amin’s release, said the deceased told him that he felt he had suffered because of his family’s inability to provide money and connections.
Ayole questioned why the police did not mediate the debt dispute after the student’s parents reportedly indicated their willingness to guarantee repayment of the outstanding amount.
The retired officer argued that the dispute could have been resolved without the prolonged detention and prosecution that eventually followed.
Al-Amin’s father, Habeeb Mohammed, also described the family as financially disadvantaged, saying his wife reportedly sold her phone to raise money for transportation and food while their son was in custody. He said the family subsequently sought assistance from relatives and well-wishers to meet the bail conditions.
The student’s death has since prompted renewed debate about the handling of debt-related disputes by law enforcement agencies.
Legal practitioners cited in the report maintained that individuals cannot lawfully seize another person’s property simply because of an unpaid debt without following due legal process. They also argued that the police should distinguish between a civil debt and a criminal offence rather than detaining a person merely over an outstanding debt.
A constitutional lawyer, Musbau Saheed, reportedly argued that debt recovery should ordinarily be pursued through lawful civil procedures and that police officers should not be used to enforce private debt collection.
The Executive Director of the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre, Okechukwu Nwanguma, also questioned whether the police response was professional and proportionate.
The police, however, had previously rejected the suggestion that Al-Amin was detained simply because of the N8,000 debt. Police spokesperson Ayanlade Olayinka said the student was prosecuted over allegations relating to assault and damage to an Airtel SIM-registration machine. The charge sheet, however, reportedly contained a reference to the N8,000 dispute.
The case has consequently raised broader questions about police powers, access to justice and the treatment of economically disadvantaged suspects within Nigeria’s criminal justice system.
For the family of Al-Amin, the dispute over a relatively small sum ended in the loss of a young man they described as a source of support and hope. His death has also prompted calls from civil society actors and legal experts for greater accountability and clearer safeguards when police become involved in disputes arising from private debts.
The circumstances surrounding the case remain a subject of public scrutiny, particularly regarding the actions of the individuals involved in the initial phone seizure, the police handling of the complaint and the subsequent prosecution.
