Confusion and public concern have trailed the decision of a Magistrate Court in Calabar to remand a 45-year-old businessman in custody after the court had officially closed for the day.

The order, issued on Monday, 14 July 2025, has drawn criticism from legal observers and civil society groups, who describe the development as both irregular and procedurally questionable.

 

The defendant, Archibong Essien, a native of Ikoneto in Odukpani Local Government Area of Cross River State, was brought before Magistrate Court 1 in Calabar under a remand proceeding initiated by the Commissioner of Police.

The remand was sought pending legal advice from the State Attorney General and Essien’s eventual arraignment before the High Court.

 

According to court insiders, the day’s cause list had already been exhausted, and the court had risen for the day when the remand application was unexpectedly introduced.

 

The prosecuting counsel, Ubi Ofem Esq., appearing for the State, argued for Essien’s remand at the Afokang Correctional Centre.

Ofem maintained that the measure was necessary to ensure the defendant’s safety and prevent any possible interference with investigations, pending the filing of formal charges at the High Court.

 

However, the defence team challenged the timing and jurisdiction of the proceeding.

Lawyers representing Essien contended that the affidavit submitted in support of the remand exceeded the scope of what a Magistrate Court could entertain, given the severity of the alleged offences.

 

They urged the court to immediately transfer the case file to the appropriate authority, citing procedural overreach and potential violations of their client’s legal rights.

 

Despite these objections, Chief Magistrate Mercy Ene ruled in favour of the prosecution and ordered Essien’s remand at Afokang Correctional Centre. The court said the decision would stand until the case is formally brought before the State High Court in Calabar.

The unusual timing of the remand — issued after court had risen — has sparked public outcry and raised questions over the transparency and legality of the proceedings.

 

A legal analyst based in Calabar, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described the incident as “a troubling example of how due process can be sidestepped under procedural pretexts.”

 

“The court rising signifies the end of the day’s proceedings. Issuing an order outside that window, particularly when it involves a person’s liberty, should concern anyone who values the rule of law,” the analyst said.

 

Efforts to reach the court registrar for an official statement were unsuccessful as of the time of filing this report.

The full details of the allegations against Mr Essien remain unclear.

However, sources close to the investigation suggest the case may involve serious charges that fall outside the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Court, further fuelling concerns over why the remand was handled in this manner.

 

Essien is expected to remain in custody at Afokang until a formal arraignment is scheduled at the State High Court. It is not yet known when that hearing will take place.

 

Civil rights advocates have called for an urgent review of the circumstances surrounding the remand, arguing that procedural safeguards must not be compromised, regardless of the gravity of the alleged offence.

 

“The rule of law must prevail  not convenience, not expediency,” one advocate said.