Ibom Air: Remand Warrant of Viral Passenger Surfaces, Observant Lawyer Shares What She Noticed
- A Nigerian lawyer, Maureen Okafor, has reacted to the remand warrant of Comfort Emmanson, the Ibom Air passenger accused of assaulting crew members and airport officials
- The observant legal practitioner said that she found glaring procedural irregularities when she examined the remand warrant, including a chronological error
- In an exclusive chat with Legit.ng, Barrister Ebimnamaonye Chidera Divine stated that a remand warrant does not become void because of prima facie errors in dates or other factual defects
Barrister Maureen Okafor, a Nigerian lawyer, has called people's attention to a chronological error she spotted in the remand warrant issued by the Magistrate Court remanding the embattled Ibom Air passenger Comfort Emmanson.
While sharing a copy of the remand warrant on Facebook, the lawyer, who found procedural irregularities in it, accused the Nigerian Correctional Service of collusion and abuse of process.
Source: Facebook
Ibom Air incident: Barrister notes 'chronological impossibility'
She further said that the accused Ibom Air passenger was hurriedly charged to court and remanded using a warrant with a chronological impossibility.
This is because it was stated on the warrant that Comfort was remanded on October 11, and is to be produced for arraignment on October 6, 2025.
She argued that the remand warrant was issued in error, and until the error is rectified, Comfort's continued detention at the Kirikiri Correctional Centre is unlawful, arbitrary, and in breach of her constitutional right to personal liberty.
Barrister Maureen called on human rights activists in Lagos state and the Comptroller General of the Nigerian Correctional Services to step in and restore Comfort's freedom. Her post partly read:
"...Friends note; the facts are straightforward: following an avoidable altercation between a passenger (Ms Comfort) and the cabin crew of Ibom Air, Ms. Comfort was hurriedly charged to court and remanded. The warrant, however, absurdly states that she was remanded on the 11th day of October, 2025 and is to be produced for arraignment on the 6th day of October, 2025, an obvious CHRONOLOGICAL IMPOSSIBILITY!đ
"Some may attempt to trivialize this as a âmere clerical error.â However, in law, the dates and particulars on a Remand order are material facts. They are not harmless errors; they go to the validity of the order itself. As held in a plethora of case laws that a court process which fails to comply with statutory requirements is fundamentally defective and renders any proceedings founded on it a nullity.
"We know that the Correctional Service, by law, cannot arrogate to itself the powers of a magistrate or judge to âcorrectâ such defects. Accepting a detainee on the basis of a facially invalid warrant is tantamount to aiding unlawful detention, contrary to the provisions of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act. In my experience, there are precedents where the Service has rejected custody of individuals due to defective remand warrants, including cases where the alleged offence was grave, such as the rejection of a blind man convicted of ra.pe until due process was followed after intervention by NAPTIP at the National Assembly.
"In this case, the remand warrant was issued in error and until the error is rectified through proper judicial process, Ms. Comfortâs continued detention at the Kirikiri Correctional Centre is unlawful, arbitrary, and in breach of her constitutional right to personal liberty. The courts have consistently held, that deprivation of liberty must be strictly in accordance with a valid court order; any deviation amounts to false imprisonment.
"This is not merely a procedural lapse, it is an abuse of the judicial process, a breach of statutory duty, and an affront to the rule of law..."
Ibom Air: Barrister reacts to colleague's observation
Speaking on the date discrepancy in Comfort's remand warrant, Barrister Ebimnamaonye Chidera Divine, founder of Pure Legal Solicitors, told Legit.ng that it does not make the warrant void.
"A remand warrant does not become void because of prima facie errors in dates or other factual defects.
"The law provides for the correction of such defects or errors, particularly where it does not prejudice the defendant. The court will look at the substance of the warrant and its intentions rather than the wrong date or other factual defects on the remand warrant.
"In criminal matters, there are material and non-material errors. What is considered in criminal matters is whether the defendant will be prejudiced by such omissions or errors.
"In these circumstances, an error in the date on the warrant does not prejudice the defendant, especially when there is a proper charge at the magistrate's court. In law, we call such errors in dates non-material errors."
When quizzed about the likely consequences for the Nigerian Correctional Service for accepting the remand warrant, the lawyer explained:
"It is the duty of the Correctional Centre to obey the order of the court first, before anything else.
"The validity, or otherwise, of the inconsistency in the form cannot be suo motu decided by the correctional services.
"Where there is a mistake or error, they will have to obey the orders of the court and seek correction of the remand warrant. There may be no consequence, for it is their duty to obey the orders of the court."
Source: Facebook
Ibom Air: Lawyer's observation triggers reactions
Legit.ng has compiled some reactions to the lawyer's observation about Comfort's remand warrant below:
Valentine Anijah said:
"My dear Maureen, you and I know that our legal system has lost their values. Check what happened 2023 election, the legal system(Court) compromised. So in light of that same things compromised standards have trickled down to all Security Agencies. But let her learn her hard lessons so as to be humbled."
Okey Nnebedum said:
"I had my suspicion. I wasn't comfortable with how fast they were able to navigate successfully in practical terms, what I know is a procedural up-and-down.
"This is totally absurd. I knew that there's something fishy. And now it's confirmed.
"The speed of their efficient announcement of her arrangement and remand gave me serious concerns; knowing how "OVERNIGHT" cases are treated in that Court."
Anthony Atata said:
"The courts have moved on from technicalities a long time ago. If she has an intelligent lawyer who is familiar with criminal trial, the lawyer will know that the substance of her case can never be dismissed because of this. Infact if her lawyer tries to start arguing about date on remand order, the court will simply correct it and remand her again on the next adjourned date. Even if it goes on appeal, her case cannot be dismissed because of a date on remand order.So no need. She was validly arraigned . That is the most important thing."
Aghaji Onyeka said:
"To cook up a charge is one thing. To prove same is another big thing."
Ibom Air: Lawyer faults Comfort's lifetime ban
Meanwhile, Legit.ng previously reported that a lawyer had argued that it was wrong for the Airline Operators of Nigeria (AON) to impose a lifetime no-fly ban on Ibom Air's unruly passenger, Comfort Emmanson.
He described the move to enforce such a pronouncement as unconstitutional and beyond the groupâs powers.
The legal practitioner also criticised the reported swift arraignment and remand of the accused passenger, alleging a violation of her constitutional right to a fair hearing.
Source: Legit.ng
