Follow Us on Google
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has withdrawn a three-count criminal charge filed against Nigeria’s former Ambassador to Zambia, His Excellency Ambassador Nwannebuike Ominyi and a co-defendant, Iduma Christian Mayor in suit number: FHC/ABJ/CR/654/2025.
The case, which had been reported in some online newspapers and blogs bothers on criminal allegations with respect to sections of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015/as amended (including references to the 2024 amendment).
Details of a record of proceedings obtained by newsmen in Abuja indicated that this development followed an application by the Directorate of Legal Services, Nigeria Police Force Headquarters, Abuja, F. G. Gabriel for and on behalf of the office of the Attorney General and the Federal Ministry of Justice of the federation dated March 24th 2026 and officially released on June 23rd, 2026.
It would be recalled that the charges preferred against the former envoy had been brought by one Emmanuel Ogai, who is described as a Nigerian industrialist on or at about the 22nd of March, 2025 and was published virally in some online and social media platforms across the nation.
However, in a withdrawal notice, titled: Notice of Withdrawal/Discontinuance of the Charge No: FHC/ABJ/CR/654/2025 Between Federal Republic of Nigeria Verse Amb. Nwannebuike Ominyi and one another, brought pursuant to Section 108 (1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 and under the inherent jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, the Prosecutor, F.G. Gabriel stated in his application before the Court for the case to be discontinued for purpose of further investigation.
“Take Notice that the Complainant, the Federal Republic of Nigeria intends that the criminal charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/654/2025, Between the Federal Republic of Nigeria Vs. Amb. Nwannebuike Ominyi 1 Ors., pending before this Honourable Court to be discontinued for purpose of further investigation.
“By this Notice of Withdrawal/Discontinuance, the charge pending before this Honourable Court against the defendant be withdrawn,” the document stated.
Court adjourns matter
Ruling on the application after extensive arguments by representatives of the Attorney General of the Federation, the Chief State’s Counsel, M. A. Oladunjoye and the Nigeria Police Force, Innocent Okorie, the trial Judge, Justice Rita Ofili Ajumogobia, adjourned the matter sine die (indefinitely) to enable the police more time to conclude investigations on petitions against the complainant, Ogai.
According to the court’s records of proceedings, the police prosecuting counsel, Innocent Kalu has affirmed before the court that there was indeed a petition first written against the nominal complainant in the matter, Ogai that had been pending before the Ebonyi State Police Command which was yet to be investigated.
“And my Lord, that investigation has not been carried out by the Ebonyi State Police Command. So when the FCID brought the case file, we looked into it, and we discovered that actually there was a prima facie case against the defendant but later he now came up with this complaint that his own complaint has not been investigated and that was why the IG now directed the Director of Legal Services to look into the matter, via three petitions against the complainant. We write a letter of withdrawal, to discontinue the matter pending the conclusion of these investigations,” he informed the court.
He further said the defendant had queried why the Police has not been able to investigate his own petitions since last year. His petition which came first in time on the same matter.
After listening to both parties, Justice Ajumogobia adjourned the matter sine die to create room for investigation into the complainant’s initial petitions pending at Ebonyi State Police Command where attention on the matter has now shifted.
In a twist like situation of a hunter being hunted, further investigation reveals that the Engr. Ogai has refused to honour several police invitation by FID and IGP legal department but rather proceeded to file a fundamental human right suit in high court in Onueke Ebonyi State. Suit No HNK/23/2026. Asking the court to stop the police from investigating him.
Facts of the case
In January 2026, the Federal Government of Nigeria filed a three-count criminal charge of alleged cybercrime offences against former Nigerian Ambassador/High Commissioner to Zambia, Amb. Nwannebuike Ominyi Eze (also referred to as Nwannebuike Ominyi or Ominyi Nwanneibuike Eze), and a co-defendant identified as Iduma Christian Mayor (also referred to in some reports as Iguma Major or similar variants).
Case Details
• Suit number: FHC/ABJ/CR/654/2025 (or FHC/ABJ/CR/654/ in some reports; sometimes described as an amended charge).
• Court: Federal High Court, Abuja.
• Assigned judge (per early reports): Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.
• Prosecutor: Charge signed by F. G. Gabriel of the Directorate of Legal Services, Nigeria Police Force Headquarters, Abuja.
• Complainant/victim named: Chief Dr. Emmanuel Ogai, described as a prominent Nigerian industrialist and CEO of Frontfield Group of Companies.
• Alleged date of offences: On or about 22 March 2025.
• Platforms: Publications on Top Trends Nigeria (online newspaper), Facebook, and other social media/computer networks.
Summary of the Charges
The prosecution alleges that the defendants conspired and published false and damaging statements intended to harm Ogai’s reputation, cause hatred, enmity, intimidation, anxiety, harassment, and bullying. Key alleged content of the publications includes:
• Calling Ogai a “serial blackmailer.”
• Claiming Ogai made false publications against Ominyi and worked to have him disqualified as an ambassadorial nominee so that Ogai (or someone linked to him) could replace him.
• Accusing Ogai of colluding with NYSC staff to remove Ominyi’s name from the NYSC national database after the 2005 service year.
The charge sheet further states that these claims were known to be false, “knowing very well that the first defendant (Ominyi) did not complete a full-time education programme at Ebonyi State University (EBSU) and was never qualified to participate in the one-year compulsory National Youth Service Corps (NYSC).”
Legal provisions cited (variations appear across reports):
• Sections of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015 / as amended (including references to the 2024 amendment in some reports), particularly provisions related to conspiracy, false publications via computer networks, and causing harm/reputational damage (e.g., Sections 24 and 27 in various subsections).
Procedural Status
Early January 2026 reports indicated the matter was scheduled for possible arraignment around 13 January 2026. The defendants were expected to take their plea. As of the most recent publicly available reporting from that period (and subsequent searches up to mid-2026), no widely reported conviction, acquittal, discharge, or detailed trial updates have been prominently documented in major Nigerian media. The case remains a pending criminal prosecution based on available information.
Context and Background Notes
• Ominyi is a non-career diplomat from Ebonyi State who previously served in public roles, including as Chief Welfare Officer under the first civilian governor of Ebonyi State.
• The underlying dispute appears tied to personal/political disagreements involving ambassadorial nomination processes, NYSC records from around 2005, and academic claims related to EBSU. The prosecution treats the published statements as knowingly false and transmitted via computer systems with intent to cause harm.
• These are allegations contained in a charge sheet. They have not been proven in court. Defendants are entitled to the presumption of innocence until (and unless) convicted after a full trial.
Sources for the above are contemporaneous Nigerian newspaper reports (The Nation, BusinessDay, The Guardian, and others) that obtained or quoted from the court documents. No independent verification of the underlying publications or of Ominyi’s academic/NYSC records beyond the prosecution’s assertions in the charge is reflected in these public accounts. Further developments would depend on subsequent court proceedings.
