Offenders Deceive and Manipulate Victims to Create Sexually Explicit Material for Extortion Purposes

The FBI has sent out a release warning parents, educators, caregivers, and children about the dangers of online activity that may lead to the solicitation and enticement of a minor to engage in sexual acts.

The statement published on its official website by the FBI Memphis Public Affairs Officer, Elizabeth Clement-Webb states that: “Sextortion involves an offender coercing a minor to create and send sexually explicit images or video. An offender gets sexually explicit material from the child, then threatens to release that compromising material unless the victim produces more. These offenders are seeking sexual gratification.

“Financially motivated sextortion is a criminal act that involves an offender coercing a minor to create and send sexually explicit material. Offenders threaten to release that compromising material unless they receive payment, which is often requested in gift cards, mobile payment services, wire transfers, or cryptocurrency. These offenders are motivated by financial gain, not necessarily just sexual gratification.

“Victims are typically males between the ages of 14 to 17, but any child can become a victim. For financially motivated sextortion, offenders are usually located outside the United States and primarily in West African countries such as Nigeria and Ivory Coast, or Southeast Asian countries such as the Philippines.

“These crimes can lead victims to self-harm and have led to suicide. From October 2021 to March 2023, the FBI and Homeland Security Investigations received over 13,000 reports of online financial sextortion of minors. The sextortion involved at least 12,600 victims—primarily boys—and led to at least 20 suicides.

“In the six-month period from October 2022 to March 2023, the FBI observed at least a 20% increase in reporting of financially motivated sextortion incidents involving minor victims compared to the same time period the previous year.”

“The FBI has seen a horrific increase in reports of financial sextortion schemes,” said Special Agent in Charge Douglas DePodesta of the FBI Memphis Field Office. “Protecting children is one of the highest priorities of the FBI. We need parents and caregivers to work with us to prevent this crime before it happens and help children come forward if it does.”

It was a nightmarish moment when the parents of Miguel Ovoke learnt that their healthy four-year-old they had sent off to school would not be coming home anymore.

The horrific incident happened at BrickHall Schools located in the Cadastral Zone B11, Kaura in Abuja on Wednesday.

Little Miguel reportedly died during the school’s feeding hours.

According to the death certificate dated April 24, 2024, issued by Excel Specialist Hospital, Abuja, which was sighted by PUNCH correspondent, Miguel was brought to the hospital by his teachers at about 11 am in an unconscious state.

The medical report, signed by Dr. Akinwande Ajayi, on behalf of the medical director, indicated that he was brought in, “on account of aspiration on meat while feeding at school.”

The hospital said upon examination, the medical team found that the boy’s pupils were fixed and dilated, with a nonreactive response to light.

His peripheral pulses were said to be “impalpable, blood pressure was unrecordable, and there was no cardiopulmonary activity or respiratory excursions, silent chest.”

The report indicated that all efforts of the medical team to resuscitate him failed.

The report concluded that he was “Brought in Dead.”

PUNCH learnt that parents of the deceased, suspecting foul play, have contacted a lawyer, Deji Adeyanju, to handle the case on their behalf. Adeyanju confirmed the development on Thursday.

Attempts to get the reaction of the school authorities as of the time of filing this report have not yielded any fruit.

The school has yet to respond to an email sent to its known email address.

PUNCH also called and sent messages to the Head of School, Gloria Ijezie, to get the school’s reaction.

However, these efforts proved abortive as the calls to her line were redirected, and the messages sent to her as of press time remained unanswered.

Follow the Law & Society Magazine channel on WhatsApp: https: //whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaL4J8rIt5rxOV1Ckl2B

The United States Government has revealed that supporters of Nigeria’s ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), attacked and prevented supporters of opposition parties, particularly Igbos from exercising their voting rights during the Lagos State governorship election in March 2023.

In a report titled, ‘2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Nigeria’, the US Department of State observed that the recent 2023 general election in Nigeria was characterised by irregularities and violent incidents.

The report disclosed that several observers who were present during the election opined that the results of polls largely reflected the wills of the voters despite voters’ intimidation and suppression in some parts of the country.

“Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: National elections were widely reported to have reflected the will of voters, despite technical and logistical difficulties, and some irregularities.

“Many independent observers assessed the results of the presidential, legislative, and state-level elections during the year reflected the will of voters, despite reports of voter suppression and vote buying, campaigning at polling stations, lack of ballot secrecy, violence, and intimidation.

“During the March 18 state election in Lagos, All Progressives Congress (APC) supporters reportedly intimidated and suppressed voters in Igbo-dominated areas, which Labour Party presidential candidate and ethnically Igbo Peter Obi won in the February 25 national election.

“Viral videos on social media showed APC supporters in Ojo threatening to attack ethnic Igbo voters presumed to be pro-Obi. In Eti-Osa, APC supporters also attacked journalists and, in some cases, shut down voting and prevented non-Yoruba voters from accessing polls.”

“They similarly destroyed property and physically blocked voters in Amuwo-Odofin. According to videos posted on social media, police officers were present but failed to respond to attacks. There was no evidence that alleged perpetrators were arrested or prosecuted,” the report said.

By Hon. Justice Ejembi Eko, JSC (Rtd.)

I agree with the Senate President’s suggested notification of judgment to the office of the Attorney General for compliance and enforcement.

The existing provisions of the Sheriff and Civil Process Act, requiring the consent and leave of the Attorney General as precondition for enforcement of court orders/judgement against government offend and are in conflict with several provisions of the Constitution, notably equality of litigants before the law at the law court.

Our governments are not above the law (following abrogation of Petition of Right under the extant Constitution); fair hearing provisions of the Constitution (especially sections 17 & 36 thereof). The Attorney General, who is “dominis litis” in all mitigations against government, cannot be a judge in his own cause nor should he be clothed with powers to override or frustrate decisions of law courts.

The office of the Attorney General, not being one of the courts the judicial powers of the Federation and the States have been entrusted by section 6 of the Constitution, shall not exercise same before, during and after trial. The Constitution has specifically vested in the courts powers to enforce their own judgement or judgement of courts superior to them.

In the circumstance the National Assembly should simply delete the offensive provisions of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act and substitute the provisions in the commendable manner suggested by the Senate President.

By section 287 of the Constitution, decisions of all courts are to be enforced by the courts and courts subordinate, and by all persons and authorities. The Attorney General belongs to the class of “persons and authorities” on whom the Constitution obligates to enforce court decisions. There is no dearth of superior court decisions on this including: Odebunmi v. Oladimeji (2012) LPELR-15419 (CA), Yar’Adua v. Yandoma (2014) LPELR-24217(SC).

Senate President Godswill Akpabio on Wednesday at the ongoing National Summit on Justice 2024 in Abuja urged the Federal Government to discard the statutory requirement on a judgement creditor to obtain the consent of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) before a monetary judgement could be enforced against the federal government.

Noting that: “Another area requiring urgent reform is obtaining the Attorney General’s consent before executing judgements, Akpabio, pointed out that the requirement constitutes a “bottleneck, delaying justice and undermining the autonomy of our judicial system.”

Although the enforcement of a monetary judgement is guided by the Sheriff and Civil Process Act and Judgement Enforcement Rules, enforcing judgement debts against the government in Nigeria, especially regarding suits bordering on fundamental human rights violations, is arduous and near impossible.

Human rights violations are rife in Nigeria, with many citizens being brutalised or illegally detained by police and the military on daily. However, the victims are discouraged from seeking legal redress because of non-enforcement of court outcomes by the government.

Many Nigerians who obtained rights enforcement judgements against the government, its agents or its officials cannot enjoy the court-ordered monetary compensation.

For instance, in December 2016, the Federal High Court in Abuja ordered the State Security Service (SSS) to pay the leader of the Shiite Islamic Movement in Nigeria, Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, and his wife Zinat, N50 million as compensation for their illegal incarceration.

Mr El-Zakzaky was arrested by the military on 14 December 2015 after a clash between the movement and officers of the Nigerian army.

The monetary judgement has yet to be complied with by the government.

Also, Nigeria has earned notoriety for not complying with verdicts from the ECOWAS Court of Justice.

The lack of judgement and debt enforcement against the government perpetuates impunity among law enforcement agents and citizens.

Proposed solution

Akpabio did not stop at decrying the impact the lack of judgement enforcement has had on the country’s justice system.

“In our view, to enhance efficiency while maintaining necessary checks, we propose replacing the requirement for the Attorney General’s consent with a mandatory notification system. Upon receiving a judgment against the government, the relevant authorities will notify the Attorney General immediately in writing.

“Following the notification, the Attorney General will have a specified period, say 30 days, to respond. The response could involve initiating an appeal or settling the matter directly. This timeline ensures prompt action and prevents undue delays in justice delivery.

“If there is no response from the Attorney General within this period, the judgment will be executed automatically.

“This measure is crucial to prevent stalling and ensure that judgments are respected and enforced promptly. In cases where the decision comes from a final court, the option to appeal is not available.

Therefore, the Attorney General’s response would be primarily directed towards settlement. This approach ensures that the government acts responsibly as a litigant and respects the decisions of our highest court in the land. Reforms like this foster trust in the justice system and improve the overall efficiency of legal proceedings involving the government,” Mr Akpabio said.

Other areas of reforms

The Senate President acknowledged that the National Assembly was aware of the delays plaguing the court system.

Mr Akpabio said the delays in hearing and determining cases “deny timely justice” and “undermine faith in our judicial system.”

He promised parliamentary approvals for budgets aimed at the implementation of judicial reforms.

Together, we can build a justice system that fits the 21st century.

The lawmaker called for the deployment of digital technology in adjudicating.

However, the use of electronic resources in the hearing and determination of suits has been at snail speed after COVID-19 compelled the Nigerian judiciary to conduct virtual proceedings in 2020.

The justice sector reform summit was declared open by President Bola Tinubu, whom Vice-President Kashim Shetima represented.

Lawyers and judges of diverse backgrounds, as well as heads of security agencies, are brainstorming in Abuja for two days to fashion out effective and efficient ways of tackling the challenges in the country’s justice system.

The event was attended by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Olukayode Ariwoola; the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi; the Deputy Senate President, Bala Jibrin; the President of the Court of Appeal, Monica Dongban-Mensem; and John Tsoho, Chief Judge, Federal High Court.

Other dignitaries were the Chief of Defence Staff, Christopher Musa, a general, and Chairpersons of the EFCC and the ICPC, among others.

Premium Times