A civil society organisation, the Initiative for Media Development and Social Impact (IMEDSI), has raised fresh concerns over the safety, medical care and custodial conditions of Chappal Energies founder and Chief Executive Officer, Ufoma Immanuel, who is standing trial over a disputed $1.5 million investment and shareholding transaction.
The group alleged that Immanuel, who is currently receiving treatment at the Lagos State University Teaching Hospital (LASUTH), was handcuffed to his hospital bed despite medical advice that he should move periodically to reduce the risk of blood clots.
In a statement issued in Abuja on Monday by its spokesperson, Onose Oseyi, IMEDSI described the alleged restraint as degrading and potentially dangerous, demanding its immediate removal and an explanation from the authorities responsible.
The organisation said its intervention was not aimed at determining Immanuel’s guilt or innocence, but at drawing attention to concerns over his constitutional rights, health and dignity while in custody.
“This is inhuman and degrading treatment for a man who has not been convicted of any offence, and it now stands as a direct threat to his life and health,” Oseyi said.
Immanuel is being prosecuted before the Lagos State Special Offences Court following allegations by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) that he and his company, Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited (IIHL), obtained approximately $1.5 million from businessman Adebisi Adebutu and R28 Holdings Limited by false pretences.
Alleged threat to life
IMEDSI said its most serious concern remained an alleged threat to Immanuel’s life.
According to the group, Immanuel approached the Department of State Services (DSS) in February 2026 to report alleged threats against him by Adebutu, but was instead detained by the agency before being transferred to EFCC custody.
The organisation said the sequence of events warranted independent clarification.
It further alleged that during a settlement meeting, Adebutu was said to have told members of Immanuel’s family that Immanuel would die in Kirikiri if he failed to surrender his shares in the disputed venture.
IMEDSI stressed that it was not presenting the allegation as an established fact, but argued that the seriousness of the claim required an independent investigation.
The organisation also said the family had brought the matter to the attention of the British High Commission, which reportedly sent a consular official to check on Immanuel’s welfare at the Kirikiri Correctional Centre.
Concerns over hospital treatment
Although Immanuel was transferred to LASUTH for treatment pursuant to a Federal High Court order, IMEDSI alleged that his lawyers and family members continued to face restrictions in accessing him.
The group further alleged that Immanuel had not been allowed to consult privately with his doctors, claiming that correctional officers remained inside or within hearing distance of medical consultations.
It questioned the medical or security justification for custodial officers being present within consultation rooms rather than outside.
IMEDSI called for uninterrupted medical treatment, confidential consultations with doctors, access to family members and legal representatives, and the removal of any restraints that conflict with medical advice.
The group said the case had been adjourned until Thursday, September 10, 2026.
It also alleged that Immanuel had repeatedly been denied bail and was, on one occasion, removed from LASUTH in the middle of the night.
“A criminal allegation does not amount to a conviction. Remand does not amount to imprisonment after trial. Custody does not extinguish dignity,” the organisation said.
Questions over $1.5m dispute
Beyond the custodial concerns, IMEDSI questioned aspects of the commercial dispute underlying the criminal prosecution.
The group said it would not prejudge evidence before the trial court, but argued that the controversy originated from a commercial disagreement over shares.
According to IMEDSI, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and the Federal High Court had previously characterised aspects of the underlying dispute as a civil shareholding matter.
It said the $1.5 million investment was made towards the acquisition of an asset that was subsequently completed, publicly announced and is reportedly in production, while R28 continues to assert an equity interest arising from the transaction.
The organisation therefore questioned what constituted the alleged false pretence if the investment achieved its stated purpose and the investor was claiming entitlement to shares arising from it.
IMEDSI, however, acknowledged that the determination of the criminal allegations remained the responsibility of the trial court.
Mauritius transaction questioned
The group also raised questions over the reported use of the same Term Sheet in parallel proceedings in Mauritius.
According to IMEDSI, R28 relied on the Term Sheet in proceedings there to support its claimed shareholding, while the same transaction forms part of the dispute underpinning the Nigerian criminal case.
The organisation called on the EFCC to explain and reconcile the competing positions.
It also drew attention to a separate corporate dispute involving Chappal Energies Mauritius, in which IIHL reportedly holds a 34.5 per cent interest.
IMEDSI said concerns had arisen over a proposed $100 million rights issue advanced while Immanuel was in detention and unable to act on behalf of IIHL.
The group alleged that the proposal, backed by a funding arrangement from R28, could have resulted in R28 obtaining a stake approaching 85 per cent and was considered at a meeting from which IIHL was recused.
It said the Supreme Court of Mauritius subsequently restrained the transaction pending arbitration.
IMEDSI stressed that the allegations surrounding the Mauritius transaction formed part of the broader corporate dispute and did not, in themselves, establish wrongdoing by any party.
Calls for rights protection
The organisation appealed to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to ensure that Immanuel’s rights and welfare were protected while the judicial process continues.
It also called on the judiciary, EFCC and Nigerian Correctional Service to strictly comply with court orders and guarantee appropriate medical care, legal representation, family access and humane custodial treatment.
IMEDSI further urged the National Human Rights Commission and other civil society organisations to independently monitor the proceedings.
It cautioned the media and the public against turning the matter into a trial by publicity, stressing that the courts remained the appropriate forum for determining the criminal allegations against Immanuel.
The organisation said the case presented two distinct but interconnected issues: the court’s determination of whether the EFCC allegations would be proved, and the obligation of the authorities to safeguard the defendant’s fundamental rights and dignity while he remains in custody.
“No allegation, no commercial dispute and no criminal prosecution should place a Nigerian citizen beyond the protection of the law,” IMEDSI said.
