A Federal High Court in Abuja has granted bail to activist and social media commentator, Justice Chidiebere, popularly known as “Justice Crack,” in the sum of N5 million.
  
Delivering the ruling on the bail application, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ordered that the bail bond must be backed by one surety in like sum.
  
The court held that the surety must reside within the court’s jurisdiction at a fixed address for at least four years and deposit proof of residence, either through a tenancy agreement or certificate of occupancy, with the court registry.
  
The surety is also required to be a federal civil servant not below Grade Level 15, with evidence of at least three months’ salary, a letter of authentication from the immediate head of department, as well as proof of pensionable employment.
   
In addition, the court directed that the surety must depose to an affidavit of means and submit a recent passport photograph, while the defendant is to deposit his international passport with the court.
  
Earlier, prosecuting counsel informed the court that the prosecution was ready to commence trial.

The first prosecution witness, identified as Uruntu Douglas, a DSS operative, told the court that he became acquainted with the defendant during investigations after the suspect was transferred to the DSS by the Nigerian Army Intelligence Corps.
   
The witness said the defendant voluntarily made an extra-judicial statement, which was recorded in the presence of his lawyers. According to him, soldiers had sent pictures to the defendant, who allegedly produced videos from the images and posted them on social media without confirming the authenticity of the materials from military authorities.
  
He further told the court that investigators extracted data from the defendant’s phone, including videos allegedly posted online, conversations between the defendant and some soldiers, chats with his godfather allegedly discussing protests, as well as excerpts from his social media pages. The witness added that a certificate of compliance was issued and signed by a superior officer after the forensic process was concluded.
  
During proceedings, defence counsel, Sam Amadi, informed the court that the defence had not been served with the investigation report and other documents the prosecution sought to tender in evidence.

The prosecution described the omission as an oversight and apologised to the court. Justice Abdulmalik subsequently admitted the DSS investigation report as Exhibit A.
   
The prosecution also tendered an iPhone allegedly recovered from the defendant, a flash drive said to contain videos posted on social media platforms, conversations extracted from the device, and the certificate of compliance
   
The defence objected to the admissibility of the flash drive, arguing that its contents had neither been described nor played in open court. Justice Abdulmalik adjourned the matter until May 25 for continuation of trial, while the first prosecution witness was yet to be discharged.