The trial of 109 foreigners accused of participating in high-level cybercrime and hacking activities suffered a setback on Wednesday at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The matter, which was fixed for commencement of trial before judge Ekerete Akpan, could not go on due to the absence of the prosecution lawyer.
|
|
The prosecution lawyer representing the Inspector-General of Police was absent from the proceedings. But defence lawyer Oluwole Aladedoye, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), was present.
It emerged during Wednesday’s court session that the lead prosecution lawyer sent a prior notice that he would be absent from court as a result of an official assignment. The letter urged the court to adjourn the scheduled proceedings.
|
|
|
|---|
Defence lawyer, Mr Aladedoye, vehemently opposed the prosecution’s application for adjournment, citing relevant portions of the law to back his argument.
He insisted that his team was ready to proceed with the trial.
The trial judge, Mr Akpan, who observed that it was the prosecution’s first time of making such an application, chose to adjourn the judgement as requested “in the interest of justice”.
The judge subsequently adjourned the matter until 22 and 23 October, for trial.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the trial, initially set for 12 May, was rescheduled for today (Wednesday) due to the absence of the trial judge who was said to have gone on official engagement.
Mr Akpan granted the foreigners a N1 billion bail on 29 November 2024.
The judge directed that their five sureties must have landed property worth N200, 000 million each.
He also directed that the sureties must deposit the original and verified documents of their landed property with the deputy registrar of the court.
The judge also directed the sureties to deposit their passports in the court’s custody.
While the male defendants were remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre, the court held that the female defendants should be kept at Keffi Correctional Centre in Nasarawa State, pending the perfection of their bail terms.
The defendants were arraigned on six counts, including involving in activities said to be threatening the nation’s security.
They all pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The foreigners are said to be citizens of China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Brazil, Malaysia and Myanmar.
The police arrested them in 2024 in their residence at Plot 1906, Cadastral Zone 807, Katampe District of Abuja, where they were said to be engaging in cybercrime by allegedly promoting “a fraudulent and unregistered gaming platform.”
In the six counts filed against them in the case marked FHC/ABJ/CR/599/2024, the police accused the foreigners of cybercrime, money laundering and unlawfully residing in Nigeria.
NAN reports that in one of the counts, they were alleged to have aided, abetted, conspired among themselves “to commit an offence, to wit; cybercrime.”
They were said to have committed the offence contrary to and punishable under Section 27 (1) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc) Act, 2015 (As Amended, 2024).
READ ALSO: N80.2bn Fraud Trial: EFCC opposes ex-governor Bello’s request to travel abroad
They were also alleged to have accessed a computer network and input with the intention that such inauthentic data will be considered or acted upon as If they were authentic or genuine.
The offence is said to be contrary to and punishable under Section 13 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc) Act, 2015 (As Amended, 2024).
Again, the police charged them with moving the “proceeds generated from operating a fraudulent and unregistered gambling platforms” from Nigeria.
“These platforms are 9f.com, c2.top, 8pg.top and you thereby commit money laundering, contrary to and punishable under Section 18 of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022,” part of the indictment reads.
The defendants were also accused of entering “the territory of the Federal Republic of Nigeria with a business permit of 30 days duration and failed to leave the Nigerian territory at the expiration of the said permit. The prosecution said the offence “is contrary to Section 4 (2) and punishable under Section 44 (1) (c) of the Immigration Act 2015.”
(NAN)
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
