Cybercrime: Adewale bag one-year jail with fine option
Cybercrime: Adewale bag one-year jail with fine option

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Friday convicted and sentenced a suspect, Adun Adewale, to one-year imprisonment with a N2 million option of fine on count one of the two charges bordering on cybercrime offences.

Justice Emeka Nwite ordered that the sentence would commence from the date the convict was arrested. He also entered a plea of not guilty on behalf of the convict for count two of the charge.

“In view of the plea for mercy by counsel and taking cognizance of the fact that the defendant is a first-time offender, I am minded to temper justice with mercy,” Justice Nwite stated.

Justice Nwite subsequently fixed March 18 for the commencement of the trial on count two.

Although Adewale had, on December 20, 2024, pleaded guilty to count one during his arraignment, he pleaded “guilty with reason” to count two when it was read to him by the registrar.

When Justice Emeka Nwite asked Adewale to explain his reason, the defendant stated from the dock that he had seen the post somewhere and forwarded it to his page.

His lawyer, Olanrewaju Olaleye, then prayed the court to grant a stand-down to confer with his client.

Although Victor Okoye, representing the police, opposed the application, the judge granted the stand-down in the interest of justice.

After the court reconvened, Adewale’s lawyer informed the court that, upon discussion with his client, it was revealed that Adewale did not understand the charge read to him.

Based on this premise, the lawyer prayed the court to have the charge read again for his client to retake his plea.

However, Okoye vehemently opposed the application, and the judge adjourned the matter to allow the parties to address the court through written arguments on the position of the law in such an instance.

Justice Nwite, on January 3, fixed Friday for ruling on Adewale’s application after both the defence and prosecution presented arguments.

Delivering the ruling, Justice Nwite agreed with the prosecution’s counsel.

The judge held that a party is not allowed to approbate and reprobate in a matter, having already pleaded guilty while being represented by counsel.

He further stated that the Supreme Court had established the procedures for the arraignment of an accused, and the question was whether the procedure was followed.

Upon reviewing the court record of December 20, 2024, the judge noted that Adewale’s lawyer had not indicated to the court that they were unprepared to proceed with the arraignment after the case was called.

He said the accused had told the court he understood English before the registrar read the charge to him.

The judge stated that the charge was read and explained to Adewale in the language he understood, which was English.

Justice Nwite said that after count one was read to Adewale, he pleaded guilty, and after count two was read to him, he pleaded guilty with a reason.

He added that it was only after Olaleye requested a stand-down and the court reconvened that the lawyer applied on Adewale’s behalf to change his plea.

According to the judge, the laid-down procedures were validly followed.

“I agree with the counsel to the complainant that the counsel to the defendant cannot stand in the shoes of the defendant to change a plea.

“A plea of guilty is made by the accused person, who does not contest the charge.

“It is conclusive evidence that the accused understands the charge and committed the offence, enabling the court to proceed with conviction.

“Consequently, the defendant is hereby convicted on count one, while I enter a plea of not guilty on count two,” the judge declared.

Earlier, Olaleye argued that the court had discretionary power to exercise in his client’s favour.

He contended that although Adewale understood English, he was a layperson and might not have understood the legal intricacies.

He argued that Adewale had not been given adequate time to consult with his lawyer.

Olaleye also asserted that allowing Adewale to change his plea would not prejudice the prosecution and emphasized that the defendant lacked a true understanding of the charge.

The prosecution lawyer, Okoye, submitted that Adewale had been duly arraigned in compliance with Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

Okoye argued that once a defendant pleads guilty or otherwise, it is presumed that they understand the charge.

He further contended that for Adewale to change his plea at that time would amount to approbating and reprobating.

Okoye also stressed that the issue of plea is the sole responsibility of the defendant and not their counsel.

He urged the court to convict Adewale on count one.

NAN reports that the convict, also known as “coachbanter,” was arraigned before Justice Nwite on alleged cybercrime offences against the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun.

In the charge, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/634/2024 and filed on December 17 by A.A. Egwu, the defendant was alleged to have, sometime in 2024, intentionally circulated a video via his TikTok username “@brodabanter_backup_page” and handle “CoachBanter.”

In the video, Adewale alleged, “Police IG Egbetokun busted for colluding with a notorious cartel moving cash from CBN (Central Bank of Nigeria) vault via Abuja, Lagos airport.”

The statement, which he knew to be false, was made “for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order.”

The offence is contrary to and punishable under Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.

In count two, he was also alleged to have accused Egbetokun of victimizing police officers to shield members of a cartel notorious for hauling suspicious new banknotes from the CBN.

The statement, also deemed false, contravenes Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.

In this article

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *