*As Managing Director And Staff Member Remain At Large
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has arraigned Metro Digital Limited, a communications company, before the Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, on amended cybercrime charges alleging that the company, its Managing Director Ifeanyi John Nwafor, and a staff member Ikenna Kanu conspired between 2015 and 2019 to unlawfully intercept and rebroadcast content belonging to Multichoice Nigeria Limited, the pay-TV giant that operates the DStv and GOtv platforms across Sub-Saharan Africa.
The company was arraigned on Tuesday before Justice A.T. Mohammed on a four-count amended charge bordering on conspiracy to commit unlawful interception and the actual interception and rebroadcast of Multichoice’s proprietary content using decoders, dongles, and other technical devices, offences charged under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015.
Metro Digital Limited, through its representative, pleaded not guilty to all four counts. The two individual defendants named in the charge, Managing Director Nwafor and staff member Kanu, are both described as being “at large,” meaning they have evaded arrest and were not present for the arraignment.
The court adjourned the matter to June 29 and 30, 2026, for the commencement of trial.
The four-count amended charge paints a picture of an organised operation to pirate Multichoice’s broadcast content over a period of four years.
Count one alleges that Metro Digital Limited (RC No. 501134), Ifeanyi John Nwafor as Managing Director, and Ikenna Kanu as a staff member, “between 2015 and 2019, at Port Harcourt, Rivers State, did conspire among themselves to commit felony, to wit: unlawful interception,” an offence contrary to Section 27(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015.
Another count alleges that the company and the two named officials, “on or about the 16th day of August, 2019, at Port Harcourt, Rivers State, did intentionally and without authorisation intercept, by technical means, and rebroadcast decoders, dongles, etc., over which Multichoice Nigeria Limited has exclusive rights in Sub-Saharan Africa,” an offence contrary to Section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes Act 2015.
The charges describe an operation that allegedly used technical means to intercept Multichoice’s encrypted broadcast signals and rebroadcast them, effectively providing unauthorised access to premium content that Multichoice distributes to paying subscribers through its proprietary decoder systems.
At the resumed proceedings, defence counsel S.A. Somairi SAN attempted to prevent the arraignment by informing the court of a preliminary objection to the charges.
However, prosecution counsel Steve E. Odiase urged the court to proceed with the arraignment on the amended charges, and Justice Mohammed refused the defence’s attempt to stall the process.
The judge cited Section 478 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which provides that “where a corporation is called upon to plead to any charge or information framed under the provisions of this Act, or any charge or information added to or altered under the provisions of this Act, it may enter, in writing, by its representative, a plea of guilty or not guilty.”
The ruling established that a corporate defendant cannot use a preliminary objection to prevent the taking of its plea. The objection can be heard at the appropriate stage of proceedings, but the arraignment itself must proceed in accordance with the ACJA’s provisions for corporate defendants.
Following the judge’s ruling, the court registrar read the charges and the company entered its not guilty plea through its representative.
According to the EFCC, investigations into the case began after Multichoice reported the matter to the Commission in 2019.
Multichoice, which holds exclusive broadcasting rights for its content across Sub-Saharan Africa, claimed that the illegal broadcast of its content by Metro Digital Limited caused it significant financial losses. The pay-TV company’s business model depends on the exclusivity of its content, which is distributed through encrypted signals to authorised decoders purchased or rented by paying subscribers.
The piracy of that content, through the interception and rebroadcast of signals using unauthorised decoders and dongles, undermines the entire subscription model by providing free or cheaper access to content that subscribers pay for, reducing Multichoice’s revenue and potentially affecting its ability to acquire content and invest in broadcast infrastructure.
The EFCC’s charges allege that Metro Digital Limited and some of its staff “worked together between 2015 and 2019 to illegally access and rebroadcast Multichoice content without permission,” a four-year operation that, if proven, would represent one of the most sustained content piracy schemes prosecuted under Nigeria’s cybercrime legislation.
The arraignment of the company alone, while its Managing Director and a staff member remain at large, creates a bifurcated proceeding. The corporate entity is before the court and has entered its plea, but the individuals who allegedly directed and executed the piracy operation have not been apprehended.
Ifeanyi John Nwafor, described in the charge as the Managing Director of Metro Digital Limited, and Ikenna Kanu, described as a staff member, are both listed as “at large.” Their absence means the trial will proceed against the corporate defendant while warrants presumably remain outstanding for the individuals.
The prosecution of a company while its directors remain fugitive raises practical challenges. A corporate defendant can only act through its human representatives. If the Managing Director who controlled the company’s operations is unavailable to give evidence or instructions, the company’s ability to mount a full defence may be compromised, though its legal counsel can continue to represent its interests in court.
The charges are brought under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015, which criminalises the unlawful interception of electronic communications, data, and broadcast signals.
Section 12(1) of the Act, cited in the substantive counts, addresses the intentional interception of communications without authorisation through technical means. The section was designed to address a range of cyber offences, from the interception of private communications to the unauthorised access of broadcast signals, and carries significant penalties upon conviction.
Section 27(1), cited in the conspiracy count, addresses the offence of conspiracy to commit any of the offences under the Act, meaning the agreement between the company and its officers to carry out the interception scheme is itself a separate criminal offence, independent of whether the substantive offence was completed.
For Multichoice Nigeria Limited, the prosecution represents the vindication of a complaint filed seven years ago and the use of criminal law to protect intellectual property and broadcasting rights that the company holds across Sub-Saharan Africa.
Content piracy has been a persistent challenge for pay-TV operators across Africa, where the cost of legitimate subscriptions relative to average incomes creates a market for cheaper unauthorised alternatives. Piracy operations range from small-scale sharing of decoder cards to sophisticated technical operations that intercept and redistribute encrypted signals.
The Metro Digital Limited case, as described in the charges, falls into the latter category, an operation that allegedly used technical means to intercept signals and rebroadcast content through devices including decoders and dongles, suggesting a commercial-scale piracy operation rather than casual content sharing.
The financial losses claimed by Multichoice, while not quantified in the charges, are described as “significant,” reflecting the potential revenue impact of a four-year piracy operation in a major commercial city like Port Harcourt.
The arraignment adds to a growing body of EFCC prosecutions under Nigeria’s cybercrime legislation, which has been increasingly used to target a range of digital and technology-related offences beyond the internet fraud cases that dominate public attention.
The EFCC has been conducting major operations against cybercrime networks across the country. In May 2025, the Commission arrested 120 suspected internet fraudsters in Lagos, seizing 26 luxury vehicles and numerous smartphones. In a separate Abuja operation, 105 suspects were apprehended for alleged involvement in internet fraud schemes, including fake hotel review scams targeting victims abroad. The agency also arrested 28 suspected Ponzi scheme operators in Minna, Niger State.
The Metro Digital Limited case differs from these internet fraud cases in that it involves the alleged piracy of broadcast content rather than online fraud, demonstrating the breadth of the Cybercrimes Act’s application to various forms of technology-enabled criminal activity.
The trial is scheduled to commence on June 29 and 30, 2026, when the prosecution will be expected to present its case against Metro Digital Limited.
The EFCC will need to establish through evidence that the company did in fact intercept and rebroadcast Multichoice content without authorisation, that the interception was carried out through technical means, and that the activity was intentional and conducted over the period specified in the charges.
The question of whether the Managing Director and staff member who are at large will be apprehended before the trial commences, and whether their absence affects the prosecution’s ability to prove the case against the corporate entity, will be significant factors in the proceedings.
For the broadcast industry in Nigeria and across Sub-Saharan Africa, the case represents a test of whether criminal law can effectively deter content piracy, a challenge that has grown with advances in technology that make interception and redistribution of broadcast signals increasingly accessible to those with the technical knowledge and commercial motivation to exploit them.
