Activist Justice Crack Slams ₦5bn Suit on Army

​Popular social media activist Chidiebere Justice Mark, widely known as Justice Crack, has instituted a monumental ₦5 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Nigerian Army, the Chief of Army Staff, and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).

​Filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja, the legal action trails his controversial arrest, prolonged detention, and alleged torture by military authorities over an alleged breach of the Army’s social media policy and a disputed online publication.

​According to court filings and statements from his legal team, the activist’s ordeals began on April 28, 2026, when he was taken into custody. Detailing the harrowing nature of his detention, Justice Crack alleged that he was handcuffed, blindfolded, subjected to extreme weather conditions—exposed to the sun during the day and intense cold at night—and deprived of adequate water and basic necessities. He was subsequently transferred to the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS), where he spent roughly 21 days before regaining temporary freedom.

ADVERTISEMENT

​Beyond the alleged physical abuse, the activist disclosed that his Hyundai saloon car was seized and impounded during the operation on April 28 and was only returned on June 9, 2026, in a severely damaged state.

​Through his lawyers, Justice Crack is urging the court to:

• ​Declare Unconstitutional: Rule that his arrest, physical torment, and prolonged detention violate his fundamental human rights enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.
• ​Restrain Authorities: Issue an injunction barring the military and its agents from further harassing, intimidating, or detaining him over the subject matter.
• ​Award Financial Redress: Demand ₦5 billion in exemplary damages for psychological and physical trauma, ₦100 million specifically for the unlawful seizure and physical damage to his vehicle, alongside another ₦200 million in general damages.

​The legal battle highlights ongoing tensions regarding civic space, digital expression, and the enforcement of service-specific codes of conduct against civilian commentators. No date has yet been fixed for the hearing of the substantive suit.