The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court has dismissed a case of alleged malicious prosecution filed against the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) by movie producer, Charles Ayiga.
Mr. Ayiga had accused the NCC of maliciously prosecuting him for offences he did not commit, specifically obstructing an NCC officer in the line of duty and unlawful possession of Federal Government documents.
He sought N200 million in general damages for being subjected to a criminal trial for over three years without reasonable justification, and an additional N300 million for losses suffered by his movie production business due to the alleged malicious prosecution.
Background
The protracted case commenced in 2011 and was heard by no fewer than five different judges, two of whom passed away before Justice Olukayode Adeniyi delivered the final judgment.
A petition was filed by Ayiga to the NCC in 2011, alleging that a television station, MYTV, had broadcast his movie ‘Arrows of Love’ without his consent.
After an initial investigation by the NCC found no prima facie case of criminal copyright infringement, Ayiga petitioned the Presidency and the Attorney General, who directed the NCC to reinvestigate the matter.
During the reinvestigation, the assigned NCC inspector, Caleb Daniel, alleged that Ayiga became violent and assaulted him when questioned about obtaining official NCC documents attached to his petition.
This led to Ayiga’s detention for obstructing an officer and subsequent prosecution by the NCC.
After a lengthy legal process involving a Fundamental Rights action by Ayiga and his eventual discharge and acquittal, he filed the malicious prosecution suit against the NCC in 2011, which has now been dismissed by the court after over a decade of litigation.
Court’s Decision
Justice Adeniyi acknowledged that the offences Mr. Ayiga was charged with obstructing an NCC officer and unlawful possession of government documents were valid offences under the law.
While Mr. Ayiga was ultimately discharged and acquitted of those charges, the court found he did not provide sufficient evidence to prove the NCC was liable for malicious prosecution.
The court held that under section 38(4) of the NCC Act, the Commission had lawful authority to apprehend Mr. Ayiga and prosecute him.
Justice Adeniyi stated, “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.”
Furthermore, the court characterized Mr. Ayiga’s N500 million damages claim as a phantom project, deliberately crafted by the Claimant to reap where he did not sow, implying it lacked merit.