By IFIOK UDOM

Court Upholds Ndifon’s Two-Year Jail Term, Orders Fresh Trial on Second Count

THE Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, has affirmed the conviction and two-year prison sentence imposed on Professor Cyril Osim Ndifon, former Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, over the solicitation of pornographic, indecent and obscene photographs from a female student.

The appellate court, in its judgment in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CR/1798/2025, upheld the Federal High Court’s decision on Count One of the charge.

However, it took a different position on the second count, holding that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to try that aspect of the case.

Conviction on Cybercrime Count Affirmed

The first count was prosecuted under Section 24 of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015.

According to the case presented by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), Ndifon, while serving as Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Calabar, solicited pornographic, indecent and obscene photographs from a female student through electronic communication.

The Federal High Court, presided over by Justice James Omotosho, found the prosecution’s evidence sufficient to establish the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

It subsequently convicted Ndifon on 17 November 2025, and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment on Count One without an option of a fine.

The Court of Appeal has now affirmed that conviction and sentence.

Evidence Included Electronic Communications

The case centred partly on communications between Ndifon and a female student.

During the trial, the ICPC tendered electronic communications alongside testimony from prosecution witnesses.

The prosecution argued that Ndifon’s position as Dean gave him significant authority and influence over students in the Faculty of Law.

Count One, however, specifically concerned the alleged solicitation of pornographic, indecent and obscene photographs through electronic communication.

After reviewing the evidence, the Federal High Court held that the ingredients of the offence had been established beyond reasonable doubt.

The Court of Appeal has now sustained that finding in relation to the first count.

Second Count Takes a Different Legal Path

The appellate court reached a different conclusion regarding Count Two.

That count concerned an allegation of conferment of undue advantage under Section 19 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.

The Federal High Court had imposed a five-year sentence on the count, with the two sentences ordered to run concurrently.

On appeal, however, the Court of Appeal held that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the offence under the ICPC Act.

It consequently ordered that Ndifon be prosecuted afresh on the second count before the High Court of Cross River State.

ICPC Considers Further Legal Action

The ICPC said it was taking steps to challenge the appellate court’s jurisdictional decision concerning Count Two before the appropriate superior court.

The commission stressed that the decision on the second count did not affect the Court of Appeal’s affirmation of the conviction on Count One.

It described the jurisdictional issue surrounding the second count as a matter requiring further judicial determination.

Case Dates Back to University Allegations

The proceedings followed allegations concerning Ndifon’s conduct towards female students while he was Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Calabar.

The case attracted wider attention after allegations of sexual harassment involving female students emerged in 2023. Ndifon was subsequently removed from his position as Dean.

The criminal proceedings were later prosecuted by the ICPC before the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The prosecution relied on witness testimony and electronic evidence in seeking to establish the charges.

What the Latest Judgment Means

The latest ruling leaves the conviction on Count One intact.

Ndifon’s two-year custodial sentence for the cybercrime-related offence has therefore been affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

Count Two, however, remains subject to further proceedings because the appellate court directed that the allegation be prosecuted afresh before the High Court of Cross River State.

The ICPC’s proposed challenge could also bring the jurisdictional question before a higher court.

For now, the appellate judgment has produced two distinct legal outcomes: an affirmed conviction on the first count and a fresh prosecution route for the second.