Edo Court Convicts Courier Agent Over Theft Of Customers’ Parcels

A Magistrate Court sitting in Benin City, Edo State, has convicted and sentenced Mr Nuhu Omokide, a franchise owner and manager of a branch of DHL in Benin City, for six months on a five-count charge bordering on stealing and unlawful interference with property.

He was given an option of N50,000 fine per count.

Mr Omokide, who was arraigned in Charge No. MEG/275c/2023/A, was convicted by Afe Osamudiamen (Chief Magistrate Grade I), under Sections 412(1)(2), 287(1)(b)(c), and 346 of the Criminal Law of Edo State, 2022.

The charge followed allegations that Mr Omokide criminally converted a parcel containing original academic certificates and other sensitive documents belonging to his customers.

The parcel was submitted at DHL’s Airport Road Office in Benin City in July 2023 for onward delivery to the United Kingdom, but allegedly disappeared under Mr Omokide’s custody and failed to arrive at its destination.

The nominal complainants, frustrated by the defendant’s dismissive and uncooperative attitude, initially reported the matter to the police.

However, Mr Omokide reportedly refused to cooperate with the Police at the AIG Zone 5 headquarters in Benin City investigating the matter and instead petitioned the Inspector General of Police, alleging harassments.

The matter was eventually charged to court upon subsequent conclusion of Police investigation.

In his defence, counsel to the defendant, Mr Razak Isenalumhe, argued that liability for the missing parcel lay with DHL as a corporate entity, not with the defendant personally.

However, the prosecuting counsel and principal state counsel, Festus Usiobaifo, submitted that where a company is involved in criminal conduct, its team, including the manager, could be held personally liable if they directly committed, aided, or abetted the offence.

Usiobaifo argued that the defendant, having admitted operational control, responsibility and close proximity to the parcel, could not hide under the corporate veil of DHL to avoid criminal liability.

He, therefore, urged the court to pierce the corporate veil, asserting that corporate cover must never be allowed to shield criminal misconducts, especially where trust is willfully breached.

Delivering his judgment, Chief Magistrate Osamudiamen agreed with the prosecution and convicted the defendant on all five counts.

The court held that company executives and managerial officers would be held personally accountable for criminal acts carried out in the course of their duties, and that corporate protection cannot extend to shield criminality.

The judgment has been described by legal observers as timely and significant, especially in the face of growing concerns over the misuse of entrusted property by courier agents.

Thereafter, stakeholders in the logistics and delivery industry were advised to draw lessons from the judgment, adding that the era where managerial negligence or deliberate conversion is masked by corporate identity is over.