The defendants face two counts amended charges bordering on cyberstalking and disseminating false information brought against them by officers from the Police Special Fraud Unit (SFU), Ikoyi, Lagos.
Justice Ayokunle Faji of the Federal High in Lagos State, on Friday, adjourned ruling on the bail application of four journalists detained over alleged cyberstalking and spreading of false information about the Chief Executive Officer of Guaranty Trust Holding Company PLC, Segun Agbaje.
The journalists are Precious Eze (Publisher/Editor-in-Chief, News Platform), Olawale Rotimi (Managing Director, National Monitor), Rowland Olonishuwa (Editor, News Hob Mag!) and Seun Odunlami (Website Administrator,www.newsjaunts.com).
The defendants face two counts amended charges bordering on cyberstalking and disseminating false information brought against them by officers from the Police Special Fraud Unit (SFU), Ikoyi, Lagos.
The defendants face allegations of intentionally spreading falsehoods on social media, including claims that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission raided GTBank due to Segun Agbaje's involvement in a N1 trillion scam, and that whistleblowers exposed Agbaje's nepotism, abuse of power, and self-enrichment, as well as that of his sister, Kofo Dosekunni.
According to the prosecution, these publications aimed to insult, intimidate, or cause harm, ill-will, or unwarranted distress to Mr. Agbaje.
It was revealed in court on Friday that the SFU, under its Commissioner of Police, Ayo Omodehinde, arrested the four bloggers without a formal invitation following a petition from the company alleging cyberstalking and attempted extortion.
During the hearing of the bail application on Friday, October 4, 2024, the prosecuting counsel, Barr. Justin Enang, told the court that while the police concluded their investigation before filing the charges. He also admitted to the court that the defendants were not formally invited before their arrest and arraignment.
Earlier, the defendants’ counsel, Barr. Kunle Afolabi, argued that the police arrested the suspects without a formal invitation.
He also urged the court not to deny the suspects bail, citing Sections 158 and 165 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.
Citing Section 24 of the Cyber Crime Prevention Act, 2024 (as amended), Afolabi maintained that the amended Act did not prescribe punishment for the allegations against the suspects.
He, therefore, urged the court to grant the suspects bail pending the commencement of the trial.
He said, "My Lord, the prosecutor had not concluded their investigation before rushing to court, and thus, this court should not deny my clients bail. We emphasize that, in accordance with Sections 158 and 165 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, the suspects are entitled to bail.
"The charges are based on an amendment because the penalties stated in Section 24 of the 2024 amended Cyber Crime Prevention Act have been substituted. The law, in Section 24 (1a and b), outlines what the punishments are under the amended Act, but if the court reverts to the old law, I leave that to your discretion. I urge your lordship to grant the bail application."
In his counterargument, the prosecuting counsel opposed the bail application, citing Section 27 of the 2015 Cyber Crime Prevention Act.
He argued that the 2024 amended Cyber Crime Act does not nullify the 2015 law, stating that the suspects had committed an offence under Section 27 of the 2015 Act.
Justice Faji adjourned the ruling on the bail application to October 14, 2024, to review the amended 2024 Cyber Crime Act and determine whether it supersedes the 2015 Act.
This case raises concerns about the police’s handling of cybercrime cases.