Group condemns ‘illegal charge’ against seven persons

Adegunwa: Nothing wrong with the charge, let court decide
I can’t give details, matter already before court, says lawyer

Human Rights Monitoring Agenda (HURMA), a non-governmental organisation that focuses on defending human rights, has condemned the “illegal and unconstitutional” charge filed against the President and founder of the Academy of Islamic Propagation (ACADIP), Yusuf Adepoju and six others at the Federal High Court, Lagos.

The other defendants are Mubarak Adepoju, Tunde Badmus (popularly known as Uptown), Adelakun Gideon, Abdul-Rasaq Akinola, Muhammed Yahaya and Abdul-Hakeem Mudathir Kewudirorun.

The defendants were accused of cyber-crime by one Ustaz Jamiu Adegunwa.

According to the group, the officers of the Nigeria Police Force Zone Two command never invited the defendants to hear their side of the story about the allegations against them.

In a petition to the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), the group said the officers of the Nigeria Police Force, Zone Two, Command never showed any petition of allegation of crime by the complainant, Adegunwa or any other person(s) before the charge was pressed against them.

The petition was signed by the group’s counsel, Lekan Alabi, who argued that it is flawed to file a criminal charge against anyone without any form of investigation.

“They were surprised and embarrassed that there was a pending charge against them before the Federal High Court, Lagos before Justice Deinde Dipeolu, before the Charge was reassigned. It is on record that Justice Nicholas Oweibo was the trial Judge over the case,” the group explained.

According to the group, upon receipt of its petition, the police command “was highly scandalised that the innocent citizens of this great country could be charged to a court of competent jurisdiction in respect of an offence that was never investigated premised on the charge filed by its officers.

“On the strength of our petition, the Police, having realised the illegality and futility of their action, filed a motion ex-parte dated December 12, 2023 to withdraw the frivolous and illegal charge.

“In its affidavit in support of the motion ex-parte dated December 12, 2023 deposed to by ASP Ahmed Kanike, the Police confirmed that the case was never investigated before the charge was preferred against the suspects,” HURMA explained.

The organisation, however, lamented that on March 3, 2023, an Assistant Chief State Counsel, T.A. Mukuolu, strangely appeared before Justice Oweibo to take over the charge on behalf of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

Yet again, on March 5, 2024, another lawyer, Oladayo Ogungbe appeared before Justice Dipeolu and informed the Court that he had the fiat of the AGF to prosecute the charge as a private prosecutor.

“As a human rights organisation, we do not see any legal justification for the prosecution of the defendants without any investigation by the police,” the body insisted and called on the office of the AGF to investigate the circumstances under which Ogungbe obtained a fiat to prosecute the defendants.

The group said: “With profound respect to the office of the AGF, there is no lawyer anywhere in the world who is not familiar with the criminal jurisprudence of investigation of crime before a prima facie case is sustained against a suspect.

“This elementary position of the law strengthens our view that the lawyers are tools in the hands of Adegunwa to embarrassingly exercise the prosecutorial power of your exalted office.”

When contacted by The Guardian, the complainant, Adegunwa, said there was nothing wrong with the charge.

According to him, the merit of the charge should be left in the hands of the court to decide. “Nothing is wrong until the court decides,” he quipped.

Pressed for further details, he said: “I can’t supply you with anything more for now, until the court decides.”

Similarly, Ogungbe, who obtained the fiat to prosecute, said he can’t give details because the matter is already in court.

He said: “I would have loved to respond to your questions in detail, but the matter is subjudice. So, I can’t go into details because my Rules of Professional Conduct for Lawyers, 2007 does not allow me to grant any interview in respect of a matter that is before the court.

“You can come to court on October 28, 2024, to observe proceedings for yourself.”