The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court set to decide SAN rank tussle

    A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory sitting in Bwari, Abuja has fixed tomorrow as date to deliver judgment in a suit filed by Mr. Beluolisa Nwofor, whose Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) rank was withdrawn by the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC).

    The LPPC, on June 23, 2017, stripped Nwofor of the prestigious rank over his alleged involvement in act of judicial misconduct.

    The committee, in a statement by its Secretary, Mr. Ahmed Gambo Saleh, said it took the decision to withdraw the rank from Nwofor at the end of its 126th general meeting held in Abuja on June 22.

    The committee, however, did not give details of the alleged misconduct for which Nwofor was punished.

    Nwofor sued the LPPC before the court over the withdrawal of the rank.

    At the resumption of proceedings before Justice O. A. Musa, the court heard pending applications filed by the LPPC as well as written addresses on the issue of jurisdiction, which was raised by the court, and subsequently adjourned the case till tomorrow for judgment.

    The court will also determine an application by the respondent to arrest the verdict of the court.

    Justice Musa, on October 4, heard the substantive application that was filed by Nwofor for enforcement of his right to fair hearing and adjourned the suit to October 9 for judgment.

    However, on October 5, the LPPC filed an application seeking to be allowed more time to defend the case and set aside the previous proceedings conducted on October 4.

    Consequently, Nwofor opposed the LPPC motion and accused the committee of employing delay tactics in order to stall the matter.

    When the suit came up before Justice Musa, counsel to LPPC, Chief Ogwu Onoja (SAN), argued that the application was not for arrest of judgment even though it was filed after the substantive case had been heard and adjourned for judgment.

  • I prefer going to jail, man, 43, tells court

    I prefer going to jail, man, 43, tells court

    An Abeokuta Magistrates’ Court sitting in Isabo, turned to theatre room on Friday when 43-year-old Saburi Yusuf, accused of damaging a car and a windscreen told the court that he was ready to go to jail.

    Yusuf, standing trial before Magistrate Idowu Olayinka on one-count charge of malicious damage, pleaded guilty to the offence.

    When Magistrate Olayinka asked the defendant if he would be able to pay for damages rather than go to prison, he said he preferred going to jail.

    “I rather go to jail instead of paying damages; I have no source of getting any money,” Yusuf said.

    However, after hearing from both the defendant and the complainant, Olayinka remanded Yusuf
    in prison and adjourned the case until Jan. 26, 2018 for more facts and sentence.

    Earlier, the prosecutor, Insp. Olakunle Shonibare, told the court that Yusuf committed the offence on Oct. 28 at Adu village, OGTV/Ajebo road in Abeokuta.

    Shonibare said the defendant unlawfully damaged the body of an Opel Sintra car valued at
    N38,000 and the car’s windscreen valued at N25,000 and two glasses of sliding windows valued at  N30,000 belonging to Tunde Olalaye.

    He said when Yusuf was interrogated after his arrest, he claimed he was sleeping by the roadside after attending a naming ceremony and was drunk “all of a sudden, I felt someone kicked me and I later discovered that it was the complainant.

    “I then went to his house to damage his properties because he even undressed me.”

    Shonibare said the offence contravened Section 516 of the criminal code laws of Ogun 2006.

  • Dasuki: Court declines request for arrest warrant against DSS’ DG

    Dasuki: Court declines request for arrest warrant against DSS’ DG

    Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday declined request by lawyer to ex-President Goodluck Jonathan, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and another Senior Advocate, Tochukwu Onwugbufor for the issuance of a bench warrant against the Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS), Lawal Daura.

    Onwugbufor is a lawyer in the defence team of former spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, representing Metuh’s firm, Destra Investment Limited in their trial for alleged money laundering offences.

    Onwugbufor and Ozekhome sought the issuance of bench warrant on the DSS’ DG for allegedly flouting the court’s order directing him (the DG, DSS) to produce former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki as defence witness in Metuh’s trial.

    Both lawyers were reacting to an application by the prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir for the court to allow DSS sometime to comply with its order to produce Dasuki.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, trial judge, Justice Okon Abang enquired from Tahir if the DSS produced Dasuki in court as he directed at the previous proceedings.

    Tahir, in response, gave details of efforts by the EFCC to ensure that the DSS produced Dasuki as ordered by the court. Tahir said he has spoken with the Legal Adviser of DSS.

    He said, “Up till this morning, exactly a quarter after 7am, the said Legal Adviser informed me that they were ready and willing to bring the intended witness to court, but that the subpoenaed witness said, on the advice of his legal team, said he has been advised not to come to court.

    “I advised the Legal Adviser, that in the circumstances the DSS found itself, they should personally come to court this morning to explain their situation to the honourable court. Our own role to facilitate by liaising with the DSS, so we have played our part,” Tahir said.

    Responding, Metuh’s lawyer, Emeka Etiaba (SAN) urged the court to disregard Tahir’s explanation on the grounds that the letter he presented in support of his position was inadmissible. He argued that it amounted to hearsay and that the letter from the EFCC to the DSS ought to have been brought to the court’s attention by way of an affidavit.

    He gave indication that his client would reassess his position as it relates to the summons on Jonathan in view of the heat generated so far, including the application filed by the ex-President.

    Etiaba said his client’s request to call Jonathan as witness had been “misconstrued outside this court”.

    Because his client was pained by the development, he intends to sit with his legal team to review the motion filed for Jonathan by Ozekhome, in order to take a position on it.

    He said, “Efforts by the first defendant (Metuh) to avail himself of necessary evidence in his trial has been misconstrued outside this court and the first defendant feels very pained because of dangerous insinuation that has been ascribed to his decision to call evidence that will help him to go through this phase of his life.

    “May I finally submit that the first defendant will go through the application with us and take a decision on what to go with Ozekhome’s motion,” Etiaba said.

    When asked to respond, Onwugbufor said he agreed with Etiaba, but took a step further to ask for the arrest of the DG, DSS for allegedly flouting the court’s order on Dasuki’s production.

    Onwugbufor, who argued that the DSS was not truthful in its excuse for not producing Dasuki, urged the court to apply the provisions of Section 244 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) by ordering Lawal’s arrest.

    He said it was ridiculous that someone in the custody of a security agency could determine when he wishes to be taken to court. He said the DSS was play game with the court.

    He said: “I do not think it lies in the mouth of DSS to say that he (Dasuki) refused to comply with the order of the court. It is more contemptuous that the DSS fails to appear before the court to explain the situations in their environment. My lord this is unacceptable.

    “If they have an atom of respect for the court they would appear before your lordship this morning and I refer your lordship to section 244 of ACJA. Your lordship has power to issue arrest warrant against DSS. Your lordship will now issue a warrant of arrest against the Director-General of DSS in person,” he said.

    At that point the judge asked him if the court could issue a bench warrant on the DG, DSS in person when the order made by the Court of Appeal on September 29 this year for the production of Dasuki before the trial court did not contain the name of the DSS’ DG.

    In response, Onwugbufor said, “I agree that his name is not mentioned but it has legal consequences and connotation. This is because a human being is occupying the office of the DG of DSS.

    “It would have been a different case if the subpoena was issued to DSS. But this is different. The order was issued against the occupant of the office, to appear before your lordship and explain to your lordship his failure to produce Dasuki in court to show how a detainee will be more powerful than the person detaining him, which is an absurdity.

    “It is my submission that they are playing hanky-panky with this court. They are passing the buck and the buck must stop somewhere. It will stop when your lordship issues a warrant of arrest against the Director-General of DSS,” Onwugbufor said.

    In his contribution, Ozekhome said he supported the call for Daura’s arrest, and called for indefinite adjournment of the trial pending when Dasuki’s motion would be determined by the Court of Appeal.

    He said, “It is inconceivable that the DSS could not bring a person who has been in their custody for two years and who has not been proved to be violent. I think they are taking this court for a ride.

    “This court is not a table tennis court, or basketball court or lawn tennis court. The applicable section therefore, is section 243 and 244 of ACJA,” Ozekhome said.

    Shortly after, Tahir indicated that a representative of the DSS, Echika Owete, has appeared in court. He proceeded to read out a text message he said he got from the DSS’ Legal Adviser, stating that Dasuki said he would not come to court except by force, but that after much persuasion by DSS personnel, Dasuki agreed to appear in court on the next date.

    In a ruling, Justice Abang declined the request for the issuance of arrest warrant against Daura.

    He said the issue of Dasuki’s production should be handled administratively by the DSS and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    The judge said: “I cannot come to a conclusion that the Director-General of DSS has flouted the court order to produce Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd). I will give further opportunity to the DG of DSS to produce Col. Sambo Dasuki in court.”

    On the absence of Jonathan in court, the judge siad since ex-President was yet to be personally served with the witness summons issued on him by the court following an application by Metuh, the option left was to serve him through substituted means, as provided for in the ACJA.

    Justice Abang said if Metuh was interested in bringing Jonathan to court, he (Metuh), having requested for the ex-President as his witness, “ought to know what to do.”

    Earlier, Dasuki’s lawyer said his client’s appeal against the court’s ruling on October 25 declining jurisdiction over his motion for stay of execution of the witness summons, has been entered at the Court of Appeal, Abuja and given appealed number: CA/A/159C/B/17.

    He said his client has also filed a fresh application before the trial court for stay of all further proceedings in relation to the witness summons against his client pending when the Court of Appeal will determine his client’s motion for stay of execution of the witness summons.

    Justice Abang subsequently adjourned to today to rule on Dasuki’s motion and Jonathan’s application.

    The judge said the outcome of his ruling on Dasuki’s motion would determine whether or not to deliver a ruling on Jonathan’s motion.

    He said should Dasuki’s motion succeeds, it implied that the case would be adjourned as requested by the ex-NSA, but that if it fails the court would proceed to hear and deliver ruling on Jonathan’s application.

    He further restated his order that DSS should produce Dasuki in court today, but said the outcome of the ruling on the ex-NSA’s motion would determine if he (Dasuki) would testify today.

     

     

  • Anambra: Court refuses Agabso’s request to stop Obiano

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected the prayer of factional leader of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Martin Agbaso, for an injunction restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising Anambra State Governor Obiano as the party’s governorship candidate in the November 18 election.

    Justice John Tsoho, in an ex-parte ruling on October 25, also declined Agbaso’s prayer for an injunction restraining Obiano from parading himself as APGA candidate for the election.

    The Nation sighted a certified true copy (CTC) of the enrolled order issued by the court on the ruling.

    The ruling was on a motion ex-parte Agbaso filed on September 28.

    The suit has Agbaso and APGA as plaintiffs, with INEC and Obiano as defendants.

    Agbaso had sought five reliefs in the motion ex-parte, out of which the court granted three.

    The court granted the first, second and fifth reliefs but rejected the third and fourth reliefs.

    It granted an order abridging time from 30 days to 10 within which the defendants will enter appearance to defend the suit.

    The court also granted an order of substituted service of copies of court processes on Obiano through substituted service by publishing them in a national daily and pasting same on the walls of Anambra State Liaison Office in Abuja and the state’s Governor’s Lodge.

    The third relief granted was an order for accelerated hearing of the suit.

    The reliefs declined by the court are:

    • An order of injunction restraining the first defendant (INEC) from recognising the second defendant as the governorship candidate of the second plaintiff (APGA) in the governorship election of November 18 in Anambra State pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

     

    * An order of interim injunction directing the second defendant from parading or representing himself as the governorship candidate of the second plaintiff in the forthcoming election of November 18 in Anambra State pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

    Justice Tsoho adjourned further proceedings till November 9.

    Agbaso, who claimed to be the authentic leader of the party, is challenging Obiano’s emergence as APGA’s candidate.

     

  • Court to decide Diezani’s application to be tried in Nigeria tomorrow

    Court to decide Diezani’s application to be tried in Nigeria tomorrow

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) yesterday opposed an application by former Minister of Petroleum Resources Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke seeking to return to Nigeria to face trial.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Dele Bolgore, with whom she was charged, also urged the court not to grant it.

    The former minister, currently in London where she is being investigated for money laundering, is praying the Federal High Court in Lagos to order the Federal Government to facilitate her return to Nigeria to stand trial.

    She said if she would not be made a defendant in the case, her name should be removed from the charge..

    Mrs Alison-Madueke is asking for an opportunity to defend allegations against her in a charge filed against her, Belgore and a former minister of National Planning Prof Abubakar Suleiman.

    The prosecution said Mrs Alison-Madueke allegedly shared $115,010,000 (about N35billion) to different individuals in 36 states ahead of the 2015 general elections.

    EFCC accused Belgore and Suleiman of directly receiving N450million in cash from Alison-Madueke. They pleaded not guilty.

    Mrs Alison-Madiueke was not listed as a defendant, but was named in the charge as being at large.

    Arguing the application before Justice Rilwan Aikawa yesterday, her lawyer Mr Onyechi Ikpeazu said his client was more or less a defendant in the case because there is a complaint against her.

    He said it was in the interest of justice and fair hearing to allow her to defend herself in four of the counts.

    “It is the fundamental right of the applicant that a criminal proceeding of this nature should not go on in her absence,” he said.

    Ikpeazu added that if EFCC does not wish to try or give her an opportunity to defend herself by listing her as a defendant, then the prosecution should expunge her name from the charge.

    “We have no objection if her name is extracted from the charge and the case goes on,” he added.

    The Senior Advocate cited a case at the court’s Abuja division of involving the Federal Government and Olajide Omokore in which Mrs Alison-Madueke was mentioned in the charge but was also said to be at large.

    He said when she brought a similar application to be listed a defendant, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba struck out the count in which she was named.

    Ikpeazu urged Justice Aikawa to be persuaded by Justice Dimgba’s ruling.

    But, opposing the application, the prosecuting counsel Mr Rotimi Oyedepo said it was a “violent abuse of court processes.”

    “The application is frivolous and is intended to annoy the parties,” he said.

    Oyedepo argued that based on Section 269 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, the prosecution can only amend a charge by adding to the counts or reducing them, not adding a defendant.

    He said if any amendment is allowed at this stage, two witnesses having been already called, the trial would start de novo (afresh).

    To him, that would occasion a miscarriage of justice.

    Besides, Oyedepo said Mrs Alison-Madueke was not even within the court’s jurisdiction having admitted in her application that she was in London.

    The EFCC lawyer said the former minister was given an opportunity before trial commenced to answer the charge, but she allegedly escaped.

    “Immediately she got to know about the investigation of this case, she absconded from Nigeria. Upon realising that she is in London, we made effort to meet her interview her there.

    “But she has always refused to meet with our team members. Her lawyer in London, one Mr John Beans, said the team would not be permitted to meet her because she’s outside jurisdiction,” Oyedepo said.

    The lawyer said the application was, therefore, “misconceived and belated”..

    According to him, apart from the prosecution who would suffer avoidable delay, the defendants would also be prejudiced.

    Oyedepo said the trial should be allowed to go on without her, adding that whenever she returns to Nigeria, she would be charged.

    “This application is intended to delay this case,” Oyedepo said.

    Belgore’s lawyer Mr Ebun Shofunde (SAN) also opposed the application, saying Mrs Alison-Madueke was not a “necessary party” to the case.

    “Without the applicant being a party, what the court will determine is the guilt or innocence of the first and second defendants.

    “The court does not require the presence of the applicant to determine their guilt or innocence,” he said.

    Sofunde added that it would be “unjust” for a trial that started in February to begin all over again when the applicant had no excuse for waiting so long.

    “I urge the court to dismiss the application,” he said.

    Replying on points of law, Ikpeazu said the fact that Alison-Madueke was just bringing the application was “secondary”.

    He said there was nothing to show that she was aware of the charge, and insisted that “the applicant is a defendant because there’s a complaint against her.”

    Justice Aikawa will decide the application tomorrow.

  • Court remands land agent for alleged racketing

    A Sokoto Magistrates’ Court yesterday ordered the remand of a 48-year-old estate agent, Lawali Maigara, for alleged land fraud.

    The defendant was accused of defrauding Mubarak Bello of Fakon Iddi, Sokoto, of N400,000 on land transaction.

    He was arraigned on a three-count charge of criminal conspiracy, breach of trust and cheating.

    The offences are contrary to sections 312 and 322 of the Penal Code.

    The prosecutor, Abubakar Mohammed, had told the court that the defendant sold a plot of land to the victim at N380, 000 and collected N20, 000 agency fee.

    He said when the victim started developing his land, the accused went and sold the same land to another person, leading to the destruction of the victim’s building.

    The prosecutor said the incident occurred in 2014.

    The accused denied the allegations and pleaded not guilty.

    The Chief Magistrate, Abubakar Adamu, ordered that the accused be remanded in prison custody until police investigation is completed.

    He adjourned the case till November 8 for further mention.

  • Court dissolves clerics’ marriage

    Court dissolves clerics’ marriage

    An Ado-Ekiti Customary Court in Ekiti State has dissolved a 16-year-old marriage between Mr. Emmanuel Jegede and his wife, Olubunmi, both clerics.

    News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the marriage was dissolved on the grounds of threat to life, provocation, stubbornness, lies and adultery.

    The petitioner, Emmanuel, 41, a resident of Irewumi Quarters, opposite Bawa Estate, Ado-Ekiti, told the court that the respondent was arrogant, lazy, stubborn and unsupportive.

    He said Olubunmi, who had three children for him, was not willing to work to assist him in taking care of them.

    Emmanuel said he was responsible for the family upkeep, including the children’s education.

    He prayed the court to separate them and award custody of his three children to him, for proper care.

    NAN reports that the parties had since January 2016 stopped living together, as the petitioner had remarried.

    The respondent, Olubunmi, 39, a prophetess, trader and resident at 31, Ifesowapo Quarters, off Nova Road, Ado-Ekiti, denied the allegations.

    She alleged that the petitioner was an adulterous man and that in 2008 alone, he committed adultery with five women in their church.

    The respondent added that she caught more women with the petitioner in their parish.

    She told the court that for two years, the petitioner abandoned her and the children.

    Olubunmi said the petitioner preferred to drink beer and smoke cigarette instead of taking care of her and the children.

    She said she was responsible for the school fees of their second child, Elizabeth, 6, since 2015.

    The respondent did not object to the divorce.

    She prayed the court to award custody of her three children to her for proper care.

    The court President, Mrs. Olayinka Akomolede, held that the marriage had broken up and dissolved it.

    She awarded custody of the three children to the respondent for proper care.

    Akomolede ruled that the petitioner would pay N2, 500 as feeding allowance on each of the three children, beginning on or before November 30 through the court registry.

    She ruled that the petitioner would be responsible for the education of the children at all levels.

    The court granted the petitioner access to his children between 8am and 6pm.

     

  • Alleged link with Alison-Madueke: Aiteo Group heads to court

    Alleged link with Alison-Madueke: Aiteo Group heads to court

    In its quest to exonerate itself of alleged link with former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, the management of Aiteo Group has engaged the services of a London law firm Mishcon de Reya and Washington’s Covington & Burling to lead ongoing efforts to address politically-motivated issues.

    A statement released by Benedict Peters, Aiteo Executive Vice Chairman informed that the firm took the decision in order to clear the air on the unfounded allegations.

    In the statement which read in part, Peters said: “I maintain my position that all the allegations are baseless and without any truth whatsoever. These unfounded allegations have caused untold disruption to my family and my business. To ensure that we remain focused, I have engaged two of the world’s leading law firms to offer both counsel and guidance in dealing with these issues.

    “There is a toxic culture of politically motivated witch-hunts that stains reputations, stifles enterprise and keeps foreign investors away from our country. For two years, I have suffered malicious, unfounded and false allegations hanging over my head.

    “This persecution is being pursued to diminish the visible endeavours to position our business, and Nigeria, at the apex of the energy industry worldwide. Despite these distractions, I remain focused on the efforts to sustain Aiteo’s growth towards becoming Nigeria’s leading indigenous oil producer. It is time to address the situation and so I have decided that I must take direct legal and other action to clear my name.”

    Aiteo Group, founded in 1999, is a leading indigenous Nigerian oil producer headquartered in Lagos.

    Alison-Madueke is being tried over allegations of enriching herself with oil proceeds working with accomplices and partners both locally and internationally.

  • NECA sues Reps to court for frequent summon of CEOs

    NECA sues Reps to court for frequent summon of CEOs

    Employers are not happy that company chiefs are being summoned frequently by lawmakers.

    Nigeria Employers’ Consultative Association (NECA) has sued the House of Representatives to court over the matter.

    According to the group, the actions of the lawmakers have been undermining business sustainability and growth.

    NECA is specifically praying the court to interpret Sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution, which the lawmakers rely on to summon the CEOs in the name of oversight functions.

    At a briefing in Lagos, its Director-General, Mr. Olusegun Oshinowo, accused members of the House, especially its committees, of disregarding court processes.

    He contended that the continued disregard of court processes and persistent summons of chief executives of organised businesses to National Assembly was a disregard of the rule of law, and legislative rascality.

    Oshinowo singled out the House of Representatives Committees on Labour, Employment & Productivity; Steel; Telecommunications; Public Safety and National Security; Ad-Hoc  Committee  on  the   Abuse  of  Pioneer  Status   by  Companies and Ad-Hoc Committee Investigating Operational Activities of Telecommunications Equipment and Service Companies/Vendors in Nigeria, as the most guilty.

    He lamented that petitions to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, over the activities of the committees had not been addressed till date, noting that to worsen the situation, members of the committees, instead of attending to CEOs directly, chose always to act through consultants.

    He said:  “All efforts at exploring the avenue of dialogue, advocacy and lobbying as evidenced through our several correspondences to the House and submissions at hearings and visits to the National Assembly seem to have been ineffective in protecting the economic rights and interest of businesses in this environment.”

    Oshinowo said the legislators only listen to themselves and have become law unto themselves. “Therefore, we are left with no option but to seek judicial solace to protect enterprise rights and provide some reliefs to businesses by staving off  the negative attitude of the legislators.

    “Despite on-going court processes, organised businesses are still being inundated with torrents of summons/invitations and requests from the House of Representatives. Recently, the afore-mentioned committees have been very active in their disregard of court processes.

    “In one instance, a company is currently being hounded with invitations from about seven committees of the House of Representatives on issues they could ordinarily have sorted out with regulatory institutions that supervise activities in that sector of the economy,” he said.

    Oshinowo said NECA expects speaker of the House of Representatives, who is a lawyer himself, and by extension, all the committees and adhoc committees within the House of Representatives and the Clerk of the National Assembly, among others, who are all restrained by the sub-judice status of this case to exercise caution until the determination of the matter.

    Oshinowo said: “We are even taken aback by the House Committees’ non respect for its own Standing Order IX Rule 5 on rules of debate, which provides as follows: “Reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending, in such a way as might in the speaker’s opinion prejudice the interest of parties thereto”