Bobrisky Drags EFCC, NASS To Court Over Rights Violation

Nigeria’s crossdresser, Idris Okuneye, aka Bobrisky, has filed a N1.2 billion lawsuit against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and National Assembly for allegedly violating his fundamental rights.

On Saturday, the crossdresser took to Instagram to share a court file dated October 10 prohibiting EFCC and the National Assembly from harassing, detaining, or declaring him wanted.

He claimed, in the lawsuit, that EFCC invited him for investigation based on a hearsay WhatsApp phone call published by VeryDarkMan.

It would be recalled that social media activist VeryDarkMan shared a purported audio conversation wherein Bobrisky claimed to have paid some EFCC officials N15 million to drop money laundering charges against him.

In the purported recording, the crossdresser also claimed that his “godfather”, alongside Haliru Nababa, Controller-General of the Nigerian Correctional Service, NCoS, ensured he served the six-month sentence in a private apartment and not in prison.

The audio recording was, however, denied by the crossdresser.

In the document shared, the crossdresser is seeking N200 million from EFCC for psychotic trauma and N1 billion from the National Assembly for violating his right to a fair hearing.

“The sum of one billion against the 1st respondent being damages for unlawful attempt to violate the right to fair hearing of the applicant, violate his right from discrimination, violate his right to private and family life, right to privacy of his home and telephone conversations.

“The sum of two hundred million naira against the 2nd respondent being damages suffered, psychotically trauma, mental torture and criminal stigmatisation caused by the reckless report given by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent without any proper investigation and fair hearing stating that the doctored social media published audio by VeryDarkMan was true, having not carried out any formal and proper investigation by contacting WhatsApp and laying before the committee that the hearsay doctored evidence was confirmed to be true and authentic.

“The violation of the right of freedom of movement, right to privacy of his telecommunication, ” the document read in part.