After 13 years of litigation, the FCT High Court dismissed a case of alleged malicious prosecution against the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC).

A movie producer filed the case, Charles Ayiga, who alleged that NCC maliciously prosecuted him for offences he did not commit.

Specifically, he said NCC maliciously prosecuted him for a purported obstruction of its officer while carrying out his official duties and unlawful possession of Federal Government documents.

Mr Ayiga who filed the case after he had been discharged and acquitted of the charges brought against him by NCC, sought N200 million general damages for being subjected to the rigours of criminal trial, for over three years, without reasonable justification.

The plaintiff also sought another N300 million in damages for the loss he claimed he had suffered from his business as a result of the malicious prosecution the defendant embarked upon.

The case, with a checkered history,  commenced in 2011 and was heard by no fewer than five different judges, two of whom had died before Justice Olukayode Adeniyi delivered a judgment. 

The two judges who entertained the case were Justice Adamu Abdu-Kafarati, a former Federal High Court chief judge, and Justice Jude Okeke of the FCT High Court.

Delivering his judgment, Justice Adeniyi held that the offences for which Mr Ayika was charged, tried, and acquitted were known to law. He said the plaintiff was discharged and acquitted of the charges in question. However, he failed to provide credible evidence to establish the NCC’s liability for a tort of malicious prosecution.

The court also held that, by the provisions of section 38(4) of the NCC Act, the Defendant was lawfully authorised to apprehend the plaintiff and charge him to court.

“I fail to see how the Defendant’s prosecution of the Claimant for the offence of obstructing a copyright officer in the performance of his statutory duties was actuated by malice or driven by vindictiveness or malevolence,” he held.

The court described Mr Ayika’s damages claim as a “phantom project, deliberately crafted by the Claimant to reap where he did not sow.”

The case commenced in 2011 when Ayika wrote a petition to the NCC alleging that a television station named MYTV had, without his consent, broadcast his movie, ‘Arrows of Love’.

The NCC investigated the petition and concluded that there was no prima facie case of criminal copyright infringement. Hence, he was advised to seek redress through a civil suit against the suspect.

Unsatisfied with the NCC’s decision, Mr Ayika petitioned the Presidency and the minister of attorney general of the federation, who directed the NCC to re-investigate the matter.

On the strength of the ministerial directives, the Commission assigned a new copyright inspector, Caleb Daniel, to re-investigate the petition.

In the course of debriefing the petitioners,  the NCC Inspector, Daniel,  had alleged that Ayika became violent and assaulted him.

Specifically, Daniel had said that Ayika became violent when confronted with the question of how he obtained official documents from the NCC, which he attached to his petition.

Mr Ayika was subsequently detained for obstruction and thereafter granted administrative bail.

Consequently, Mr Ayika instituted a Fundamental Rights action against the NCC while the agency filed a charge against him for obstructing a copyright inspector in the course of carrying out his official duties under Section 38(4) of the Copyright Act, Cap C28, Laws of the Federation, 2004.

After hearing the parties’ arguments, the court dismissed the Fundamental Rights matter on the ground that the action was premature because of the pending criminal matter against  Mr Ayika.

Meanwhile, the charge of obstruction continued. After the proceedings, the claimant, MrAyika, was discharged and acquitted.

Subsequently, Ayika filed a suit against the Commission for malicious prosecution at the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court.

The court presided over late Justice Abdu-Kafarati, who declined jurisdiction to hear the suit on the grounds that the action was founded on the tort of malicious prosecution and transferred it to the FCT High Court.

Upon being transferred to the FCT High Court, the matter went to full trial under the late Justice Jude Okeke.

Mr Okeke had reserved judgment in the suit but sadly passed on before the reserved date.

The case was then re-assigned to Mr Adeniyi before the matter started de novo (afresh). 

(NAN)