Alleged Hackers of N1.9 Billion MTN Airtime, Data Granted N50m Bail

A Lagos Federal High Court has granted bail to two men accused of hacking into the MTN Nigeria Communication Plc system and stealing N1.9 billion worth of airtime and data. Timothy Oluwabukola and Anthony Odemerho were granted bail in the sum of N50 million each by Justice Akintayo Aluko on Tuesday.

The duo had been arraigned by the police on charges of conspiracy, fraud, and unlawful access to computer systems. The prosecution alleged that they had illegally gained access to MTN’s system and siphoned off a substantial amount of airtime and data.

The Special Fraud Unit of the Nigeria Police docked the two men before Justice Aluko on a four-count charge of conspiracy, unauthorised access to the company’s web-based Application Programming Interface (API), and unlawful conversion.

Oluwabukola, a student of Moshood Abiola Polytechnic (MAPOLY) Abeokuta, Ogun State, and Odemerho, the proprietor of Resign Regal Academy in Benin City, Edo State, allegedly committed the offences between January and April this year in Lagos and Edo States.

Justice Aluko, in his ruling on separate bail applications filed by the defendants through their lawyers, ordered them to produce two sureties, one of whom must be a civil servant either in the federal or Lagos state civil service and a grade level 14 officer.

The judge also directed that the second surety must be a landed property owner within the jurisdiction of the court, must provide evidence of ownership, and swear to an affidavit of means.

The court further directed that the defendants should be remanded in the custody of the Nigerian Correctional Services (NCoS) pending the perfection of their bail conditions.

Justine Enang, prosecutor, had told the court that the defendants and others at large conspired among themselves and accessed the telecom’s Application Programming Interface (API) of MTN and obtained data from the said application, which they used to defraud the company to the tune of N1.9 billion.

Enang also claimed that the offences contravened sections 27(1)(b), 6(2), and 28(1)(b) of the Cybercrime (prohibition, prevention, etc) Act, 2015, as amended in 2024, but were punishable under Section 8(2) of the same Act.

He also informed the court that the offences violated section 18(2)(b) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, but punishable under Section 18(3) of the same Act.