Man jailed one year for cybercrime

A Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday, sentenced a man, Adun Adewale, to a one-year imprisonment with a N2 million option of fine for cybercrime.

Justice Emeka Nwite, who ordered that the sentence should begin from the date the convict was arrested.

“In view of the plea of mercy by counsel and taking cognisance that the defendant is a first offender, I am minded to temper justice with mercy,” he said

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

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that though Adewale had, on Dec. 20, 2024, pleaded guilty to count one when he was arraigned; the defendant, in count two, said he “pleaded guilty with reason” when it was read to him by the registrar.

When Justice Emeka Nwite asked him what was the reason, Adewale explained from the dock that he saw the post somewhere and he forwarded it to his page.

His lawyer, Olanrewaju Olaleye, therefore, prayed the court for a stand down in order to confer with his client.
Although Victor Okoye, who appeared for the police, opposed the application, the judge stood down the matter in the interest of justice.

After the court reconvened, Adewale’s lawyer told the court that he had discussion with his client and Adewale told him that he (defendant) did not understand the charge read to him.

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

But Okoye vehemently opposed the application and the judge adjourned for the parties to address the court through a written address on the position of the law in such instance.

Justice Nwite had, on Jan. 3, fixed today for a ruling on Adewale’s application after the defence and prosecution lawyers presented their arguments for and against the matter.

Delivering the ruling on Friday, Justice Nwite agreed with the argument of counsel to the prosecution.
The judge held that a party is not allowed to approbate and reprobate in a matter, having pleaded guilty while being represented by a counsel.

He said that the Supreme Court had laid down the requirements in the arraignment of an accused and the question was whether the laid down rule was followed.

While going through the court record of Dec. 20, 2024, the judge observed that Adewale’s lawyer did not indicate to the court that they were not ready to proceed with the arraignment after the case was called.

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

He said the charge was read and explained by the registrar to Adewale in the language he understood which was English.
Justice Nwite said after count one was read to Adewale, he pleaded guilty and after count two was read to him, he pleaded guilty with reason.

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

According to the judge, it is obvious and abundantly clear that the laid down rule was 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 plea.

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

“It is a conclusive evidence that the accused understands the charge and committed the offence and the court can go ahead and convict him.

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

Earlier in his argument, Olaleye argued that the court had the discretionary power to exercise such power in favour of his client.

He said though Adewale understood English, he was still a lame man because he might not understand the legal intricacies.

He said Adewale was not given adequate time to consult with his lawyer.

The lawyer, who said that the prosecution would not be prejudice if Adewale is allowed to change plea, said the defendant lacked true understanding of the charge read to him.

He urged the court to grant their application.

But the prosecution lawyer submitted that Adewale was duly arraigned in compliance with Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

Okoye argued that once a defendant pleaded guilty or otherwise, “it is presumed that he understands the charge preferred against him.”

He said for Adewale to change his plea at the time would amount to approbating and reprobating.

According to the lawyer, issues of plea is not delegatable.

He further argued that Olaleye agreed that he was the one that prayed for a stand down and not Adewale.

Okoye, who said that the issue of plea is a sole responsibility of the defendant and not counsel, 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 offence against the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, Kayode Egbetokun.

The I-G had, in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/634/2024, sued Adewale as sole defendant.
In the charge filed on Dec. 17 by A.A. Egwu, the defendant was alleged to have, sometime in 2024, intentionally sent video recording by means of computer system and network through his Tiktok username: “@brodabanter_backup_page” and handle “CoachBanter.”

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

The statement he knew to be false, “for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order.”
The offence is said to be contrary to and punishable under Section 24 (1) (b) of Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.

In count two, he was also alleged to have sent a video through his Tiktok username accusing Egbetokun of victimising police officers to shield members of a cartel notorious for hauling suspicious new bank notes from the CBN.

The statement, which was said to be false, was contrary to and punishable under Section 24 (1) (b) of Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.