A Federal Excessive Courtroom in Abuja on Tuesday, mounted Jan. 6, for ruling in a bail utility filed by Olamide Thomas, who allegedly threatened Seyi Tinubu with loss of life menace on social media.
Justice Emeka Nwite mounted the date after T.J. Aondo, who appeared for Thomas, and lawyer to the prosecution, Victor Okoye, made their submissions for and towards the bail utility.
Upon resumed listening to, Okoye instructed the court docket that the matter was slated for the listening to of the bail utility and that he had filed and served his counter affidavit on the applicant’s lawyer.
Transferring the bail movement, Aondo stated the appliance, dated Dec. 20, was served on similar date.
He stated it was introduced pursuant to the 1999 Structure and Administration of Prison Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.
The lawyer stated the appliance prayed the court docket for an order admitting Thomas to bail pending the listening to and dedication of the cost earlier than the court docket.
He urged the court docket to confess his consumer to bail on liberal phrases, assuring that she wouldn’t soar bail.
However Okoye, who stated a counter affidavit was filed on Dec. 30, prayed the court docket to refuse Thomas bail utility.
Okoye equally urged the court docket to discountenance the displays connected to the bail request.
He argued that the paperwork have been extracted from the web in contradiction with Part 84 of the Proof Act.
He additional argued that any newspaper publication sought to be rendered in court docket must be licensed by the Nationwide Library.
“We submit that these printouts aren’t price admitting as proof,” he stated.
Okoye additionally argued that Thomas claimed that she was affected by an ailment with out attaching any medical report.
He urged the court docket to discountenance the submission.
However Aondo interjected, arguing that Okoye can’t orally converse on Thomas ill-health, having didn’t state this of their counter affifavit.
The senior lawyer additionally argued that the whole affidavit filed by the prosecution didn’t meet the necessities of Part 115 of the Proof Act.
He cited Paragraph 17 of the affidavit which he stated equally fell wanting Part 115 of Proof Act.
He stated the prosecution argument can’t cease the court docket from exercising its discretionary energy beneath Part 6(6) of the structure to grant his consumer bail.
He stated the facility of the court docket to confess the defendant to bail can’t even be premised on her manufacturing of medical report, citing Sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Structure.
Additionally citing a Supreme Courtroom resolution on the admissibility of newspaper publications, Aondo argued that an affidavit presumed to be on oath is already licensed.
He stated the prosecution didn’t raised any subject on whether or not Thomas won’t escape if granted bail.
Aondo, due to this fact, prayed the court docket to train its discretionary energy in favour of Thomas.
Justice Nwite adjourned the matter till Jan. 6, 2025 for ruling.
The decide, who hinted that the case file can be remitted again to the chief decide after the ruling, stated his responsibility as trip decide would finish on the date.
The Information Company of Nigeria (NAN) experiences that Thomas was, on Dec. 20, arraigned and remanded at Suleja Correctional Centre after she pleaded not responsible to the three-count cost most well-liked towards her by the Inspector-Basic (I-G) of Police.
Thomas was arrested on allegations bordering on harassing and threatening Seyi Tinubu; the I-G, Kayode Egbetokun and the Police Public Relations Officer, Muyiwa Adejobi, in a viral social media submit
Within the cost marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/636/2024 dated and filed on Dec 18 by the police group of legal professionals led by A.A. Egwu, Olamide was sued as sole defendant.
NAN experiences that in depend one, Olamide was alleged to have, someday in 2024, knowingly and deliberately transmitted communication within the type of video recording by pc system or community on her social media platforms whereby she made remarks in Yoruba Language.
Within the video, she was alleged to have said “that Mr Seyi Tinubu would die this 12 months, and misfortune and calamity had befallen the Tinubu household, with intent to bully, threaten, harass the particular person of Mr Seyi Tinubu.”
The communication was stated to have positioned Seyi in worry of loss of life, violence or bodily hurt.The offence is opposite to and punishable beneath Part 24 (2) (a) of Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, And many others.) (Modification) Act, 2024.
In depend two, the defendant was alleged to have deliberately transmitted communication within the type of video recording whereby she made remarks in Yoruba Language to bully, threaten, harass the particular person of Mr Egbetokun.
The communication was stated to have positioned Egbetokun in worry of loss of life, violence or bodily hurt.The offence is opposite to and punishable beneath Part 24 (2) (a) of Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, And many others.) (Modification) Act, 2024.
In depend three, Olamide was accused of deliberately transmitting or inflicting the transmission of communication within the type of video recording whereby she made remarks in Yoruba Language, stating that the kids of Adejobi would all die earlier than his eyes.She was quoted to have additionally stated that “he (Adejobi) will bury all his youngsters in a single day, with Intent to bully, threaten, harass the particular person of Mr. Muyiwa Adejobi.”
The communication was stated to have positioned Adejobi in worry of loss of life of his family members.The offence is claimed to be opposite to and punishable beneath Part 24 (2) (a) of Cybercrimes
