MTN MD, Toriola, others for arraignment May 14 over copyright infringement
The absence of two accused persons, MTN’s Managing Director Karl Toriola and MTN’s Senior Executive, Nkeakam Abhulimen in court on Monday, stalled their scheduled arraignment over alleged copyright infringement before a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja.
Others to be arraigned with the two Executive officers are MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd, Fun Mobile Ltd, a telecommunications service provider; and its Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Yahaya Maibe.
The matter, which was slated for the accused to take their plea could not go on shortly after the case was called.
It was gathered that Toriola and Abhulimen were not also represented in court by counsel, but MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd was represented by Obafemi Ajaba, while Fun Mobile and Maibe were represented by Abdullateef Afolabi.
A lawyer and former acting Director-General of Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) Abdul Kohol, together with Zino Ugboma were in court and announced appearance as watching brief for the nominal complainant, Maleke Moye, who was also in court.
NCC had in a charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/111/2024, sued MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd, Toriola, Abhulimen, Fun Mobile Ltd and Maibe as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.
In the three count-count charge dated March 19 and filed March 20 by Emeka Ogbonna, counsel to NCC, the prosecution alleged that the defendants, between 2010 and 2017, “offered for sale, sold and traded for business, infringed musical works of Maleke Moye, an artiste, without his consent and authorisation.”
The Commission alleged that the defendants used Maleke’s musical works and sound recordings with subsisting copyright, known as “caller ring back tunes” without the authorisation of the artiste.
It stated that the musical works and sound recordings of the musician allegedly infringed upon include “911, Minimini-Wana Wana, Stop Racism, Ewole, 911 instrumental, Radio, Low Waist, and No Bother.”
The defendants were also alleged to have illegally distributed the musical works to their subscribers, without authorisation, thereby infringing on the rights of the artiste.
In the third count, the defendants were alleged to be having in their possession, the musical works and sound recordings of the artiste, other than for their personal or domestic use.
According to the charge filed by the copyright commission, the alleged offence is punishable under Section 20 (2) (a) (b) and (c) of the Copyright Act, Cap. C28, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
When the matter was called for the defendants to take their plea, Toriola and Abhulimen were neither in court nor represented by any lawyer.
Ogbonna, who appeared for the prosecution, told the court that the matter was supposed to be for the arraignment of the defendants. The lawyer informed the court that the commission had investigated them, adding that most of them were already on administrative bail.
He said though the expectation was that all of them would be in court today but two did not. The prosecution however sought an adjournment to enable them do the needful.
“If they don’t come willingly, we know what to do to bring them before the court,” he said.
Obafemi Ajaba, who appeared for the 1st defendant (MTN), however, told the court that only the company was served the court processes as far as they knew.
Ajaba submitted that they had filed a motion on notice on April 26, challenging the jurisdiction of the court to proceed on the matter as presently constituted.
He said the Communication firm sought an order striking out the charge for beng incurably defective and incapable of activating the jurisdiction of the court.
Giving two grounds, he said the 1st defendant was not a juristic person, and therefore robbed the court the requisite jurisdiction to entertain any proceeding with respect to the applicant.
Besides, the lawyer argued that the signature on the charge herein being the originating process in the criminal action cannot be traced or ascribed to any legal practitioner authorised to practice law in Nigeria contrary to the clear statement of the law as enunciated by the Supreme Court.
But Justice Ekwo rhetorically asked Ajaba if he had studied the provision of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) in respect of raising objection.
The judge, who noted that the prosecution had already applied for a date for plea, adjourned the matter until May 14 for arraignment.