Trader decries slow dispensation of justice

A trader, Livinus Ireka, has decried the slow dispensation of justice in the trial of his subordinate, Chinaecherem Afunanya, who allegedly stole N1,200,000 from his shop.

The police had charged Afunanya at the Magistrate’s Court, Apapa, Lagos for the alleged offence in 2021, and since then, the matter has continued to linger.

The complainant (Ireka) said the defendant stole the money from his shop (Ireka Cosmetic Shop) in Mushin, Lagos.

Ireka said: “I kept over N30,000 in the shop. By the time I came back, I didn’t see the money and I noticed that my goods were reducing. When I checked the value of goods that got missing, it was worth N1,000,000. I checked another money I kept and discovered that it was also missing, making it a total of N1,200,000.

“By the time I went back to his house to question him, he had run away. I immediately contacted the police and reported what had happened. The police subsequently caught and arrested him.”

According to him, the defendant didn’t deny the allegation levied against him by the complainant.

Following his arrest, the police charged him with a single offence of stealing before Magistrate, L.O Kazeem of the Magistrate’s Court, Apapa.

The one-count reads: “That you Afunanya on November 12, 2020 at about 11:00 at Amuwo Odofin Lagos in the Apapa Magisterial District did steal total sum of N1,200,000 property of Ireka, and thereby, committing an offence punishable under section 287 of the criminal laws of Lagos State Nigeria, 2015.”

But the defendant had since pleaded not guilty before the court.

However, the complainant pleaded that since the case came up in August 2021 at the Magistrate Court, it has been on trial within trial.

He lamented that the IPO, Inspector Elue Glory, who is to give evidence, doesn’t come to court and also the defence counsel and prosecutor do not come to court regularly, thereby, causing delay in his pursuit of justice.

“After trial, the IPO gave evidence and the case was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The defendant’s counsel requested for trial within trial, when the matter had got to the stage for the IPO to give evidence.

“Unfortunately, the IPO won’t be in court, and it is also the same experience with the prosecutor, who is always absent,” Ireka lamented.