The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court orders police to pay victim N80m for illegal detention, prosecution

    The Lagos State High Court in Ikeja has ordered the Nigeria Police and a Lagos businessman, Rapheal Obi,  to pay N80 million to a clearing agent, Rapheal Okonkwo, for illegal detention, torture and malicious prosecution.

    Justice Babajide Candide-Johnson held that Okonkwo’s arrest, detention and prosecution before an Igbosere Chief Magistrate Court for alleged theft of a 40ft container, containing Topgel MC valued at N36.4 million, was unlawful and malicious.

    The court noted that the police failed to conduct any credible investigation before prosecuting Okonkwo.

    The judge held that the action of the police was “a patent and blatant abuse by the Police of the enormous powers of criminal prosecution.

    “The entire investigation by the Police, according to the court, and the evidence given in this court was the reception of a petition in respect of the case, the arrest of the accused person and the taking of his statement.

    “They did not give evidence of any investigation as to the theft of the container. Therefore, their evidence is of no use in determining the guilt or otherwise of Okonkwo”, the court held.

    Okonkwo was discharged and acquitted in charge No A/55/2004 by Chief  Magistrate Akintunde Olufemi Isaac.

    Through his lawyer, Abang Mkpandiok, he sued at the High Court, seeking among others, a declaration that his prosecution by the Police in charge A/55/2004, on the instigation of Rapheal Obi was malicious and injurious to him.

    He demanded N100million as damages.

    Justice Candide-Johnson said he believed the submission of the claimant that the attack on him was to avoid payment of a N60 million indebtedness.

    The judge also held that it was Obi who arranged the movement of Okonkwo from the detention of the Police at the Special Fraud Unit (SFU), Milverton Road, Ikoyi, Lagos  to Special anti-Robbery Squad (SARS).

    “What exactly does this case have to do with armed robbery and SARS who are specifically a squad to tackle armed robbers? I can only arrive at one inference that the movement of Okonkwo to SARS was activated by an unjustifiable intention to inflict injury on him and a desire to cause him harm.

    “On the totality of evidence before this court, I hold that Rapheal Okonkwo has credibly established and proved all the requisite ingredients of malicious  prosecution.

    “Accordingly, I enter judgement forthwith in favour of Okonkwo against Rapheal Obi, Superintendent  Ibrahim Haruna Ishaq and the Inspector General of Police that the prosecution of Okonkwo in charge No A/55/2004 on the instigation of Rapheal Obi is malicious and injurious.

    “N80 million is awarded against all the defendants jointly and severally,” Justice Candide-Johnson said.

  • Lawyer urges court to stop military deployment for police duties

    A rights activist, Chief Malcolm Omirhobo, has asked the Federal High Court, Abuja, to declare the deployment of the military in place of the police to maintain law and order as unconstitutional.

    Omirhobo prayed the court to order the military’s withdrawal from the Southeast and Southsouth zones.

    He prayed the court to stop the federal and state governments from deploying the Military to the Southwest, Northcentral, Northwest and the Northeast zones.

    According to him, ending military “occupation” of the said zones and regions would free the indigenous peoples and the public therein “from exploitation, oppression, humiliation, embarrassment, fear, harassment, coercion and intimidation.”

    In a January 8, 2018 fundamental rights suit filed on behalf of 373 ethnic nationalities and 45 pressure groups and agitators in Nigeria, Omirhobo asked the court for 22 reliefs.

    Joined as respondents in the suit are the Federal Government, the President, Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) National Assembly Senate President, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Service Chiefs and the Minister of Defence.

    Others are the 36 state governments, Attorneys-General and Houses of Assembly.

    Omirhobo urged the court to unban the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and declare it a non-terrorist group.

    Furthermore, Omirhobo prayed for a declaration that the 1999 Constitution “is not a peoples Constitution” and was invalid as a social contract between the Federal Government and the indigenous peoples within Nigeria “on grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation, deceit and undue influence.”

    In another instance, the lawyer urged the court to declare Nigeria as a failing state that requires the enactment of an “autochthonous” constitution created by Nigerians and approved “via a referendum to save Nigeria from disintegrating.”

    He prayed for an order compelling the IGP to take charge of the enforcement and maintenance of law and order in Nigeria particularly the Southeast, Southsouth Zones and the Niger Delta region.

    Omirhobo urged the court to compel the president “to train, equip and adequately fund the Nigeria Police to enable her perform her primary and statutory responsibilities” in the country.

    He is also seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents, “from exploiting, oppressing and discriminating against the Southeast, SouthSouth Zones and the Niger Delta Region.

    The lawyer formulated 12 grounds upon which the reliefs were sought, including the “gross misrepresentation and distortion of the agitation of IPOB for the self-determination of the indigenous peoples within the Southeast.

    According to him, the 1999 constitution “is an invalid social contract on the grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation, deceit and undue influence.”

    No date has been fixed for hearing of the suit.

  • Court bans Labour Party Chairman from Party Secretariat

    Court bans Labour Party Chairman from Party Secretariat

    An Abuja Area Court order has issued an order restraining the embattled national chairman of the Labour Party, Alhaji Abdulkadir Abdulsalam from parading himself as the national chairman of the party and from entering the party’s national secretariat pending the determination of the suit before it.

    The Deputy National Chairman and National Secretary of the party, Chief Calistus Okafor and Barrister Julius Abure respectively has gone to court seeking to restrains the embattled former National Chairman, Abdulsalam or his representive from stepping into the party office and to stop parading himself within the properties of the party office pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

    Making the order, Presiding Judge, Aliyu Ibrahim said, “the defendant/respondent is hereby restrained either in person by his Prives, Agents or any person or body claiming through him from trespassing or stepping into the party office and to stop interference with the properties of the party and the office (Labour Party) pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.”

    The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC has refused to recognize Dr. Mike Omotosho as the acting National Chairman of the party after a National Convention of the party held on the 3rd of October 2017 removed Alhaji Abdulsalam ‎as the substantive chairman of the party.

    But the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), the body that registered the the Labour Party has asked all parties in the dispute tearing the party apart to maintain status quo ante, pending the outcome of its intervention.

    The party had earlier in a petition to the Commissioner of Police, FCT command in December alleged that the inability of INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu ‎from respecting the outcome of the party’s convention is capable of jeopardize Labour Party as well as posing a threat to National security and peaceful co-exiatence of the party.

    Alhaji Abdulsalam was accused of financial recklessness, breach of trust, forgery, misappropriation and criminal intimidation.

    According to the petition the party alleged that Abdulsalam “recruited the services of heavily armed thugs and forcefully chased out staff and 19 members of the National Working Committee from the office. At the moment our office is occupied by heavily armed thugs. We are however amazed at the highest level of impunity and oppression which we have been subjected to in our own country especially in the 21st century under the administration of our amiable president who has zero tolerance for corruption.”

  • Court strikes out Jonathan’s wife’s N2b suit

    Court strikes out Jonathan’s wife’s N2b suit

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out a N2billion rights enforcement suit filed by former First Lady Patience Jonathan against the Economic and Financial Crimes (EFCC).

    Mrs Jonathan alleged that the freezing of accounts belonging to her and some of her relations, following interim forfeiture orders got by the EFCC, and the alleged raiding and searching of her properties, violated her fundamental rights.

    She sought, among others, a restraining order against the EFCC and N2billion damages should the court find that her rights were violated.

    In a judgment yesterday, Justice John Tsoho held that although the case was not an abuse of court process, as argued by the EFCC, Mrs. Jonathan was not entitled to all the reliefs she sought because she failed to prove her case.

    Justice Tsoho resolved two of the three issues identified for resolution against her. The first issue was whether the suit was not an abuse of court process, with the judge holding that it was not.

    On the second issue, which relates to whether the various acts of the respondent (EFCC) against the applicant referred to in the affidavit in support of the application violated any fundamental rights of the applicant, the court said the acts alleged did not violate her rights

    On the third issue, which was whether the applicant was entitled to the reliefs sought in the application, Justice Tsoho said Mrs. Jonathan was not entitled to any of the reliefs sought because she failed to prove her case.

    Justice Tsoho faulted Mrs. Jonathan’s claim that the alleged indiscriminate freezing of her accounts and those of her relations, on allegation of money laundering without any invitation and interrogation amounted to a violation of her fundamental right to own property and fair hearing.

    The judge noted that although the applicant fervently denied her involvement in criminal activities, it was her words against that of the respondent. He added that, on that score, it could be said that the steps taken by the respondent are based on reasonable suspicion of the applicant having committed a criminal offence.

    Justice Tsoho relied on the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Dangaba vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria 2012 LPELR 19172, particularly pages 23 to 24, to hold that the ex-parte order obtained by the EFCC to attach her assets, which are under investigation, did not violate her rights to fair hearing and to own property.

    The judge added that the powers of the court under sections 28 and 29 of the EFCC Act to grant such ex-parte orders, “convers special jurisdiction and is a statutory power which is superior to the rules of court, and the order granted under such power operates until the determination of the civil rights and obligations of the parties with regards to the properties under consideration.

    “I am therefore guided by Dangaba case (supra) to hold that the applicant’s rights to own properties and fair hearing have not been violated by the acts of the respondent.”

    The judge said she also failed to establish her claim that the EFCC invaded, raided and unlawfully conducted searches on her properties having not provided evidence to counter EFCC’s denial of being involved in the activities alleged.

    On her allegation of the violation of her fundamental right against discrimination her political views expressed during the 2015   general elections there is no verifiable evidence before this court to prove that point, and it stands defeated.

    The judge said in the absence of any verifiable evidence before the court to prove the point that she was being victimised and discriminated against because of her political view, the point stood defeated.

    The judge said: “Having held that the applicant’s case is not made out, I further hold that the applicant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought in this application. The applicant’s suit is accordingly struck out.”

  • Court stops EFCC from probing Ekiti finances

    Court stops EFCC from probing Ekiti finances

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) cannot look into the books of state governments without a report of indictment from their legislatures, the Federal High Court has ruled.

    The court held that such a probe by the anti-graft agency violates sections 4, 5 and 6 of the 1999 Constitution, which prescribes separation of powers.

    According to the judgment delivered yesterday by Justice Taiwo Taiwo of an Ado-Ekiti Federal High Court, banks are not entitled to submit, release to or disclose to any person, body or agency, including the EFCC and the inspector-general of Police (IGP) or any other investigating body, any document or financial records.

    The verdict was delivered in a suit filed by the attorney general of Ekiti State against the EFCC and the IGP.

    Other defendants are the state auditor general, state accountant general and chairman, Ekiti State Universal Basic Education Board (SUBEB).

    The rest are: Skye Bank Plc, Access Bank Plc, Zenith Bank Plc, First City Monument Bank Plc, Diamond Bank Plc, Keystone Bank Plc, Heritage Bank Plc, Fidelity Bank Plc, First Bank Plc and Union Bank Plc.

    The suit was filed consequent upon receipt of letters from the EFCC inviting some officials to give details on transactions of the state.

    The anti-graft body also sent letters to banks seeking release of government’s financial records.

    Justice Taiwo held that the EFCC cannot usurp the oversight functions of a House of Assembly under sections 128 and 129 to initiate a probe or criminal proceedings against a state official.

    He ruled that only the state legislature is vested with oversight function and investigative powers over states’ finances, appropriation and implementation after receiving a report from the state auditor general or the state accountant general, as the case may arise.

    Justice Taiwo held: “It is unassailable that there is separation of powers. Under a federal system, sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Constitution provides separation of powers, which guarantees independence and disallow encroachment of powers. The powers for control of fund, financial outflow, appropriation are vested in the House of Assembly.

    “It is the auditor general of the state who has the power to conduct checks on government corporations and to submit his report to the Assembly.

    “Nobody, including the court, can read other meaning into the clear provision of the Constitution.

    “The Assembly has the responsibilities on the management of funds by the Executive. They have the responsibility to ensure fund management, cut wastages, reject corruption, among others.

    “The first defendant (EFCC) is bound to operate within the constitution and cannot operate like the Lord of the Manor. Its statutory duty is not a licence to contravene the Constitution.

    “I can’t, by any stretch of imagination, see how the statutory functions of the (EFCC) can extend to a state in a federation under any guise to the extent that the eight to 18 defendants (banks) will be directed to submit bank details.

    “Yes, the first defendant can investigate any person or corporate organisation; what it can’t do is to usurp the powers of the Assembly.

    “The Federal Government cannot impose its statutory duties on a state in flagrant disobedience to the Constitution. The prosecution should not ride roughshod of the Constitution. It is the duty of judges to ensure they don’t listen to sentiment of the public.

    “I resolve all issues in favour of the plaintiff. I grant all reliefs sought by the plaintiff in view of the fact they are live issues.

  • Ex-Ekiti NURTW chief: Court frees seven

    Ex-Ekiti NURTW chief: Court frees seven

    An Ekiti State High Court yesterday discharged and acquitted all the seven persons accused of complicity in the murder of a former National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) Chairman, Omolafe Aderiye.

    The court verdict, which lasted over three years, sparked emotions and wild jubilation by families, associates and supporters of the defendants outside the court premises.

    Aderiye, an ally of Governor Ayo Fayose, was killed on September 25, 2014, at his private motor park, Lafe Ade Transport Services, at Ijigbo area of Ado-Ekiti, the state capital.

    The accused persons who were freed yesterday are: Adebayo Aderiye (aka Ojuigo), Adeniyi Adedipe (aka Apase), Sola Durodola, Kayode Ajayi, Oso Farotimi (aka Oso Polo), Sola Adenijo (aka Solar) and Rotimi Olanbiwonnu (aka Mentilo).

    The case started in November 2014 after Fayose came to power and the accused had been in prison custody since then.

    Justice Adekanye Lekan Ogunmoye held that the prosecution failed to prove the complicity of the accused in the murder of Aderiye.

    In arriving at the judgment, the judge held that the police failed to investigate the alibi of the accused, which proved fatal to the case of the prosecution.

    He ruled that the accused succeeded in convincing the court that they were not on the scene of the crime, which the prosecution failed to rebut.

    According to him, the prosecution failed to prove the count of conspiracy to kill the late Aderiye and the count of murder against the seven defendants.

    Justice Ogunmoye held that the case of the prosecution was not helped by contradictory evidence led its witnesses, which he said the court would not believe.

    The judge, for instance, faulted the evidence of the first prosecution (PW1), Wale Ibidapo, that Adesokan Adedeji Israel got out of a Golf car and shot sporadically into the air before firing the shot that killed the late transporter.

    Justice Ogunmoye held that “it is inconceivable that amidst sporadic gunshots, the witness would observe the purported killer(s), as what would be in the mind of the witness was how to escape from the scene; hence the court won’t believe Ibidapo’s evidence”.

    Another witness, whose evidence was discountenanced was PW3, Gbolahan Okeowo.

    According to the judge, the witness gave “mutually contradictory” evidence.

    He held: “Inconsistencies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses has created a doubt. Where two or more witnesses give contradictory evidence, it will be illogical to believe their testimony.”

    Justice Ogunmoye also held that in the charge of murder, the case must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, which he said the prosecution failed to do in the matter.

    He said: “None of the alibi raised by the defendants was investigated by the police. The evidence of the prosecution failed to bring down the evidence of the defendants.

    “The plea of evidence succeeds that the accused were not on the scene of the crime. The prosecution failed to rebut the evidence of the defendants. The prosecution has been unable to prove that the death of Chief Omolafe Aderiye was caused by any of the defendants.

    “There was nowhere conspiracy can be inferred against any of the defendants. The first to seventh defendants are hereby discharged and acquitted.”

    There was drama within and outside the premises of the State Judiciary Complex after the court rose.

    Some families of the defendants rolled on the ground while others wept.

    Armed policemen had a hectic time controlling the massive crowd of supporters outside the court as they sang and carried some of the defendants shoulder-high.

    Security was tight as the Fayose administration had scheduled a rally same day to drum support for Deputy Governor Kolapo Olusola at Fajuyi Park near the court premises.

    Oni, APC hail court verdict on members’ acquittal

    Former Ekiti State Governor Segun Oni and the state chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) have hailed the verdict of the State High Court, which discharged and acquitted seven members of the party for the murder of former National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW), Chairman Omolafe Aderiye.

    Oni, the APC Deputy National Chairman (South) and a governorship aspirant in next year’s election, said justice had been done to the discharged party loyalists.

    In a statement yesterday by his media aide, Steve Alabi, the APC chieftain said the Judiciary proved itself again as the last hope of the common man.

    The statement said Oni was the governorship aspirant who attended the court sittings to show solidarity with the accused throughout their trial.

    Oni said Ekiti will respect the rights and freedom of the citizens, no matter their status when, by the grace of God, a new day dawns in the state this year.

    Also, in a statement by its Publicity Secretary, Taiwo Olatunbosun, APC praised the state Judiciary for living up to the expectations of the people.

    The party said the discharged persons were framed up.

    It expressed delight that “one of the many illegalities of Fayose and his gang of criminals has been foiled by the court in Ado-Ekiti today (yesterday)”.

    APC said: “We are happy as a party that the truth has reigned over falsehood, despite Fayose’s intrigues in perpetually keeping innocent citizens in prison over trumped-up murder charges orchestrated by him and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) terrorists.

    “The discharge and acquitted verdict pronounced by the presiding judge has vindicated us that Ekiti is under bondage of a ruthless governor who could do anything to subvert the constitution, the rule of law and keep innocent people in pains to rot away for the offences they do not commit.

    “We commend the judge and the Judiciary for this landmark judgment. By this verdict, our people are a bit relieved that for once the Judiciary in Ekiti will regain its independence under the megalomaniac rule of Fayose.

    “We shall do everything under the law to end Fayose’s misrule and season of anomie in Ekiti State this year.”

    “We will join and support our people to seek redress against the illegality of their detention and sufferings.”

     

     

     

  • Court dissolves pastor’s marriage

    Court dissolves pastor’s marriage

    •’She curses me with her private parts’

    A Pastor, Bernard Towoju, yesterday urged an Igando Customary Court in Lagos to dissolve his marriage to his wife, Abosede, for allegedly using her private parts to curse him.

    Towoju, 53, said in his divorce petition : “I cannot continue to make love with a woman who always goes naked and swears for me with her private parts.”

    According to him, Abosede is stubborn, wayward and troublesome.

    “She once came to my office to fight me and tear my clothes in the presence of my colleagues. We fight on daily basis and hurt each other a lot. We always land in the police station after our fight, in fact, we are regular customers at the station,’’ he said.

    The petitioner accused his wife of threatening his life, adding that she always hits him with dangerous weapons whenever they quarrelled.

    “I had to run away from the house I built 10 years ago to rent an apartment for safety. She chased me with cutlass, bottles and sticks; our neighbours can testify to that. I am afraid, I cannot sleep under the same roof with her with my eyes closed,” he said.

    He begged the court to dissolve the marriage, saying his love for her has waned.

    But Abosede, a fashion designer, accused her husband of calling her a witch.

    “He said everywhere he went for solution to his problems, they always tell him that I am behind his predicament. My hands are clean; I know nothing about his woes.

    “Towoju abandoned me and the children 10 years ago, I have been taking care of the children,” the 46-year-old woman said.

    The mother of four urged the court not to grant her husband’s request, saying :  “I still love him”.

    The court President, Mr Akin Akinniyi, said: “Since the petitioner insisted on divorce after several interventions, the court has no choice than to dissolve the union in spite of the fact that the wife still claims she loves her husband.

    “The court pronounces the marriage between Pastor Bernard Towoju and Mrs Abosede Towoju dissolved today (yesterday). Both parties, henceforth,  cease to be husband and wife.

    “Both are free to go their separate ways without any hindrances and molestation’’.

  • Court returns Lamido’s case file for reassignment

    Court returns Lamido’s case file for reassignment

    Justice Babatunde Quadri of the Federal High Court, Abuja, yesterday returned the case file of former Jigawa Governor Sule Lamido to the court’s central registry for reassignment.

    Lamido, his sons, Aminu and Mustapha, alongside Aminu Abubakar, Batholomew Agoha, and three companies are facing a 43-count charge, bordering on corruption.

    Quadri had admitted Lamido to bail in the sum of N100 million, while others were admitted to bail in the sum of N50 million each and two sureties each in like sum.

    Lamido and his co-defendants were arraigned before Justice Evelyn Anyadike of the Federal High Court, Kano State, on July 9, 2015 for allegedly misappropriating funds belonging to Jigawa Government.

    The case was later transferred to the Federal High Court, Abuja, where Justice Gabriel Kolawole, a vacation judge, granted them bail, and adjourned the matter until Sept. 22, 2015.

    The matter was then assigned to Justice Adeniyi Ademola, but following his arrest and prosecution by the Department of State  Service (DSS), the matter was transferred to Quadri.

    Following the acquittal of Ademola, one of his counsel, Mr Offiong Offiong (SAN), prayed the court to return the matter to Ademola on the grounds that 18 witnesses had already testified.

    But the prosecuting counsel, Mr Chike Okoroma, objected on the grounds that the lead counsel to Lamido, Mr Joe Agi (SAN) was tried alongside Ademola for corruption related offences.

    The matter later went to the Court of Appeal and the appellate court held that the matter should continue before Ademola.

    At the resumed hearing, Quadri noted that, “in view of the recent developments, the case is remitted to the central registry for further directives by the Chief Judge of the court.’’

  • Fayemi to Fayose: we shall meet in court over your ban

    The Minister of Mines and Steel Development, Dr Kayode Fayemi, has said the latest suit by the Ekiti State government accusing him of fraud is “a desperate attempt to tarnish his public service record”.

    In a statement by his media aide, Olayinka Oyebode, the minister expressed his readiness to meet the Ayo Fayose government in court.

    He said: “This just goes to show their level of desperation to tarnish Dr Fayemi’s public service record. The government, out of desperation, refused to release the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the report of the panel to Fayemi’s counsel, more than a month after he sent in a written application for the CTC of the report.

    “The lawyer asked for the CTC of the report as part of the documents he needed for a suit he filed challenging the outcome of the panel. Now, the same government, which refused to release the report, is going to court based on the same report.

    “Can you see mischief, double standard and deliberate witch-hunting? But we shall meet in court.”

  • IPOB: No evidence Kanu is in Army’s custody — Court

    IPOB: No evidence Kanu is in Army’s custody — Court

    A Federal High Court in Abuja said yesterday that there were no evidence supporting the claim by the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) that its fleeing leader, Nnamdi Kanu was being held the Nigerian Army.

    Justice Binta Nyako, in a ruling yesterday, rejected an application by IPOB, seeking to compel the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) to produce Kanu.

    The ruling was on the application by IPOB seeking “an order of Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum, commanding the respondent (Buratai), to produce the applicant in court.”

    IPOB had, in a supporting affidavit, claimed not have not seen or heard from Konu since September 14, 2017, when men of the Nigerian Army allegedly  invaded his house “on a murderous raid, where life and mortar bullets were fired on unarmed and defenceless populace, leaving 28 persons dead and abducting many”.

    The COAS, in a counter-affidavit, denied knowledge of Kanu’s whereabouts. He said contrary to claims in the suit, soldiers who were deployed to the South-East for ‘Operation Python Dance II, did not have any contact whatsoever with Kanu on September 12 or 14, or anytime thereafter as alleged.

    He added that the Nigerian Army did not, at any time, arrest or take Kanu into custody within the period the military operation lasted. He also denied the allegation that soldiers invaded the IPOB leader’s house in Afara-Ukwu Ibeku, Umuahia, Abia State.

    In her ruling yesterday, Justice Nyako observed that the applicant failed to provide sufficient and credible evidence to convince the court that Kanu was indeed in the custody of the Nigerian Army.

    The judge said:  ”The doctrine of last seen”, which the applicant relied upon, even though applicable in murder cases, has no statutory backing.

    Justice Nyado, who observed that Kanu was listed as the first applicant, said she was surprised that someone said to be missing, was the one seeking reliefs from the court.

    She said the supporting affidavit filed by Kanu’s lawyer, Infeanyi Ejiofor, contained criminal allegations against the Nigerian Army that must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.”

    The judge added: “Has the applicant placed enough evidence to show that the respondent was the last to see the applicant? Was there any evidence that he was last seen with even one soldier?

    “The onus of proof will not shift from the applicant to the respondent except the applicant is able to prove that he was last seen by the respondent. This, they have failed to do.

    “This application fails and it is hereby dismissed. Be ready for your case”, Justice Nyako said.

    Shortly after the court’s ruling, Ejiofor urged the court to guide parties on what next steps would be taken.

    Justice Nyako said: “As far as I am concerned, the applicant is on bail. Was he not released on bail based on an undertaking by sureties?

    “The sureties guaranteed to produce the applicant in court for his trial, so three of them should produce him. They made an undertaking and deposed to the fact that they will produce him to stand trial.

    “If there is any reason they cannot produce him, they should tell me on that date,” Justice Nyako said.

    The IPOB leader is facing a five-count treasonable felony charge the Federal Government preferred against him and four other pro-Biafra agitators, Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu, David Nwawuisi and Bright Chimezie.