The prosecution in the cyberstalking case filed by the Inspector-General of Police against Chioma Okoli has formally closed its case, with the defence opting to file a no-case submission.
Human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong, disclosed in a post on X on Thursday that during the resumed hearing, the prosecution completed the cross-examination of its second witness and announced it was closing its case against Okoli.
Following this, defence counsel informed the court of its decision to file a no-case submission, contending that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case warranting the defendant to open her defence.
The trial judge adjourned proceedings until March 31, 2026, to hear arguments on the no-case submission.
The matter, popularly known as the “Erisco case,” stems from a 2023 Facebook review by Okoli concerning Nagiko Tomato Mix, produced by Erisco Foods Limited.
The latest development follows an earlier setback for the prosecution when it withdrew several documents it had sought to tender before the Federal High Court, Abuja Division.
Police counsel, Adam Ugwuanyi, withdrew the application before Justice Peter Lifu after strong objections from the defence. Effiong had challenged the admissibility of the documents.
The withdrawn materials included a petition addressed to the Inspector-General of Police, copies of Okoli’s Facebook post, emails allegedly from Chinese business partners of Erisco Foods, an online publication by NAFDAC, photographs of protesters, a demand notice, and a purported apology letter.
The defence argued that the electronically generated documents failed to meet the requirements of Section 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011, which governs the admissibility of computer-generated evidence. Effiong also maintained that some of the documents were public records that had not been properly certified in line with Section 104 of the Act, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Kubor v. Dickson (2013).
After the objections were raised, the prosecution withdrew the documents and sought an adjournment to regularise its filings. The defence opposed the request and asked for N500,000 in costs, accusing the police of wasting the court’s time.
Justice Lifu held that no convincing reason had been provided for the adjournment and agreed that the prosecution had wasted the court’s time. He subsequently directed the prosecution to proceed with its witnesses.
Earlier in the proceedings, Justice Lifu had encouraged both parties to consider an amicable settlement under Section 17 of the Federal High Court Act, which empowers courts to promote alternative dispute resolution.
While the prosecution argued that it was up to the defendant to initiate settlement talks, the defence alleged that the Chief Executive Officer of Erisco Foods had insisted on pursuing the matter despite attempts at intervention.
Since it began in 2023, the case has generated significant public debate, including claims by the defence that police officers attempted to re-arrest Okoli despite an existing restraining order from another division of the Federal High Court.
With the prosecution now closing its case, the court’s decision on the no-case submission will determine whether Okoli will be required to enter her defence or whether the charges will be dismissed at this stage.
