The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has struck out the suit against four bloggers who were accused of cyber stalking Guaranty Trust Bank, its holding company, GTCO Plc and its Group Chief Executive Officer, Segun Agbaje.

Justice Olayinka Faji struck out the suit following the withdrawal of the criminal charge filed against them by the police after reaching terms of settlement.

This reprieve for the bloggers is coming after they have been held in custody for six months.

The four bloggers, Precious Eze, male (38), Olawale Rotimi male (47), Rowland Olonishuwa, and Seun Odunlami, were arraigned before the court under the Cybercrimes Prohibition Prevention Act, by operatives of the Police Special Fraud Unit (PSFU), Ikoyi, Lagos.

They were specifically charged with spreading false information about GTCO Plc and its Group CEO Agbaje.

When the matter came up on Thursday for trial, the prosecuting counsel, Ajibola Aribisala (SAN), told the court that the prosecution and the nominal complainants, GTBank have finally succumbed to the defendants’ plea to have another look at the matter.

Aribisala said the defendants had surrendered and agreed to ameliorate the wrongs that led to their prosecution.

He also added that the Guild of Editors had intervened and GTBank is amenable to have the matter amicably settled under the terms agreed.

The prosecutor added that each of the defendants willingly agreed and appended their signatures on the document containing the terms of the settlement.

In the terms of the settlement, a copy of which was obtained by Channels Television, it was unanimously agreed that for an amicable resolution of the disputes between the complainant and the defendants, the defendants undertake:

a. To refrain from publishing any false, malicious, or defamatory content against the complainant, its affiliates, directors, or officers in the future.

b. To use their platforms to educate journalists on responsible reporting and fact-checking.

c. To promote positive and factual content about the Complainant.

d.Publish a retraction of their respective malicious publication earlier made against GTCO and its CEO on their respective blogs.

e.To jointly publish public apologies to GTCO, its CEO (Mr. Segun Agbaje), and GTBank in three national newspapers upon a withdrawal of the charge.

The prosecutor then asked the court to accept the terms.

He said, “We appeal that the court approves the document containing the terms as agreed in the deed of settlement so that they can go back to their families after spending six months in the custody of the Nigeria Correction Services”.

The defendants’ counsel, Olakunle Afolabi, had also via a letter dated 30th January 2025, communicated the defendant’s acceptance of and willingness to comply with the conditions for settlement outlined above.

“Subsequently, in compliance with the stipulated conditions for settlement, each of the defendants issued personally and individually signed letters of apology and retraction of defamatory publication dated 18th February 2025 to Mr. Segun Agbaje, GTCO, and the complainant respectively,” the letter read.

“The said letters of apology were delivered to the prosecutor via a cover letter also dated 18th February 2025, signed by the defendants’ counsel, Mr. Olakunle Afolabi, Esq.

“In consideration of the apologies tendered and undertakings made by the defendants, the complainant as a peace-loving and socially responsible organization has unequivocally indicated its decision to withdraw the complaint made against the defendants.

“The complainant has also accepted the undertakings made by the defendants (as outlined in the letters dated 30th January 2025 and 18th February 2025) in good faith and trusts that the defendants will implement the said undertakings.

“The Complainant, however, reserves the right to re-submit its petition to the appropriate law enforcement agency should the Defendants fail to fulfill their obligations under this deed.

“Parties hereby agree that the execution of this Deed of Settlement and the fulfillment of the terms and conditions contained herein SHALL be a bar to the enforcement of the right that would otherwise accrue to any of the Parties in respect of the facts-in-issue in the charge.

“All the parties further agree that withdrawal of charge No. FHC/L/CS/774C/24 and the fulfillment of the terms and conditions contained herein will also be a bar to any civil liability that may arise from and/or bothers on Charge No. FHC/L/CS/774C/24 or the facts-in-issues in the said charge.

“The defendants confirm that they have not been coerced, pressured, and/or induced to execute this Deed of Settlement.

“The defendants affirm that they have willingly and voluntarily executed this Deed of Settlement.

“The defendants confirm that they were not restrained, induced, or subjected to any form of duress whatsoever at the time of executing this Deed of Settlement.”

Counsel to the defendants, Kunle Afolabi in his submission before the court said he is not objecting to the withdrawal of the charge, adding that he and the defendants have appended their signatures on the document.

After listening to the parties, Justice Faji held that the parties shall comply with the terms of the agreement as contained in the deed of settlement.
He then struck out the charge.

The police had in the amended charge dated September 26, 2024, alleged among others that the four defendants, sometime in August 2024 in Lagos, conspired amongst themselves to commit a felony to wit: cyberStalking, and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 27 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act 2015 as amended in 2024.

The defendants were also alleged to have knowingly sent false messages or publications in social media, through a computer or network to the general public as follows “EFCC, FIRS storm GTBanks over Segun Agbaje’s N1 trillion scam” and “Whistle Blowers expose Segun Agbaje’s Nepotism, power play” which they alleged enriched him and his sister among other publications.

The police alleged that the publications insulted Agbaje and also caused criminal intimidation, annoyance, ill-will, needless anxiety, injury, and hatred to him and the defendants thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under section 24 (1) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition/Prevention) Act. 2015, as amended in 2024.