This case revolves around Ezekiel Thankgod, the former manager of renowned Nigerian gospel singer Mercy Chinwo, who is facing allegations of significant financial fraud amounting to $345,000. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) initiated legal proceedings against Ezekiel, accusing him of mismanaging Chinwo’s finances, specifically by diverting royalties earned from her digital platforms and event performances. The EFCC’s counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, argued that Ezekiel failed to remit Chinwo’s rightful share of these earnings, leading to the substantial financial loss. The case unfolded in the Federal High Court in Lagos, presided over by Justice Alexander Owoeye.
The initial court proceedings witnessed a clash of legal arguments between the prosecution and the defense. Ezekiel’s lawyer, Monday Ubani, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), vehemently contested the EFCC’s pursuit of an arrest warrant against his client. Ubani characterized the dispute as a contractual disagreement rather than a criminal matter, emphasizing that the core issue stemmed from a breach of contract, not fraudulent activity. He further informed the court that Ezekiel had proactively filed a fundamental rights enforcement suit against the EFCC in a separate court, seeking to prevent his arrest. This legal maneuver aimed to protect Ezekiel’s fundamental rights while challenging the basis of the EFCC’s actions.
Ubani reinforced his defense strategy by informing Justice Owoeye that Ezekiel had lodged a preliminary objection to the charges leveled against him. This legal tactic challenged the validity and admissibility of the charges, asserting that they lacked sufficient legal grounds to proceed. Furthermore, Ubani argued for the court to revoke the previously issued arrest warrant, claiming it was unjustified and based on a flawed understanding of the situation. He emphasized that his client had not been formally served with the charges by the EFCC, raising questions about procedural fairness.
The EFCC’s counsel, in response, acknowledged the difficulties encountered in executing the arrest warrant against Ezekiel. She sought the court’s permission to serve the charges directly to Ubani in open court, suggesting this alternative method to ensure proper notification. This move aimed to bypass the difficulties in personally serving Ezekiel while still upholding the legal requirement of informing the defendant of the charges. The EFCC counsel also conceded that the arrest warrant might no longer be necessary, given Ubani’s acceptance of the charges on behalf of his client.
Following the exchange of arguments, Ubani, having received the charges on Ezekiel’s behalf, requested the court to schedule a hearing for the preliminary objection. This request aimed to address the fundamental legal issues surrounding the charges before proceeding with the arraignment. Justice Owoeye, after considering the arguments presented by both sides, announced the court’s decision to adjourn the proceedings.
Justice Owoeye acknowledged the defense counsel’s acceptance of the charges and the filing of the preliminary objection. He stated the court’s intention to deliberate on the pending application before making further decisions in the case. Consequently, the judge adjourned the proceedings to February 14, 2025. This date was set for the potential arraignment of Ezekiel and, importantly, for the hearing of the pending applications, including the preliminary objection challenging the validity of the charges. This approach ensures a thorough examination of the legal arguments before proceeding with the substantive aspects of the case. The adjournment allows both parties ample time to prepare for the hearing and present their arguments comprehensively. The court’s decision reflects a commitment to due process and a fair hearing for all parties involved, ensuring a just resolution to this complex financial dispute.
