The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court remands man in prison for false information

    Court remands man in prison for false information

    AN Upper Area Court sitting in Gudu, Abuja has remanded Mr. Ahmed Echoda in Keffi Prison for giving false information, which led to the raid on Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu’s home.

    Echoda was remanded after his arraignment on a one-count charge of criminal conspiracy and given false information to mislead public servant contrary to 97(1) and 140 of Penal Code Law.

    The charge signed by Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Ibrahim Agu reads: “That you Ahmed Echoda age 50 of No 44 Living Truth Street, Masaka, Nassarawa State and one Maiwada Adamu now at large did conspired within yourselves by informing the office of IGP at Guzepe Area of FCT Abuja that House No 10 Gamges Street Maitama FCT, Abuja occupied by Oliver Ogbenyi is being maintained and used for criminal activities, including keeping of arms and ammunitions. Unfortunately, after the police carried out diligence execution of the search warrant no incriminating items were found there.You are by such action mislead the police and hereby committed the above offences.”

    After the charge was read, the defendant pleaded not guilty to the one count charge.

    The defendant, who was given a chance to speak in court, said the police have not proven to him how he passed false information to them.

    “I neither passed written nor verbal information to the police,” the defendant said.

    The defence counsel, Peter Ugwuoke, then applied for bail for the defendant.

    Police prosecution counsel David Taiwo opposed the bail application, saying the offence committed by the defendant is not ordinarily bailable

    “The accused may tamper with investigation since one of the accused persons is still at large

    “Therefore, we are praying the court to refuse this bail application,” he said.

    After listening to both parties, Chief Magistrate Umar Kagarko adjourned till June 5, for ruling on the bail application.

  • Court remands developer in prison

    An Igbosere Chief Magistrates’ Court yesterday remanded a developer, Felix Ezeamama, in prison for alleged attempted murder, armed robbery and unlawful damages.

    Chief Magistrate Abimbola Komolafe made the order following an application by Chief Superintendent of Police (CSP) , EffiongAsuquo, Officer in Charge of State Criminal Investigation and Intelligence Department (SCIID) at Panti, Yaba Lagos Mainland.

    Asuquo, relying on Section 264 (1)&(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2015, said the application would enable the Directorate of Public Prosecution (DPP) issue legal advice on the allegations against the suspect.

    Ezeamama, according to the charge committed the offences on the morning of May 6.

    Asuquo said the suspect, alongside others now at large while armed with guns, cutlasses and sledge hammers demolished a property at 41, Alfred Rewane Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

    According to him, during the demolition, the suspect attempted to kill one Alhaja Halima Abubakar and her 91-year-old mother, and also carted away £7000, $5000 and N5million as well as some jewellery.

    Ezeamama, he added, shunned police invitations on several occasions, but was arrested following the issuance of a warrant against him on May 9, by Chief Magistrate O. O. Oshin.

    He urged the court to grant the application.

    Ruling, Chief Magistrate Komolafe remanded Ezeamama in prison custody for 30 days, pending the DPP’s advice.

    She adjourned till June 30.

  • Court orders Ifeanyi Ubah’s release from DSS custody

    Court orders Ifeanyi Ubah’s release from DSS custody

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday ordered the unconditional release of Capital Oil Limited Chairman, Dr. Ifeanyi Ubah, from the Department of State Services (DSS) custody.

    Justice Mohammed Idris said Ubah’s detention without charge was illegal.

    He directed the DSS to file a criminal charge against Ubah within 48 hours if it has a case against him or release him with no conditions attached.

    Ubah has been in detention for weeks over allegations that he diverted petroleum products stored in his tank farm by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).

    “Security agencies must understand that they are not instruments of debt recovery,” Justice Idris held.

    He also said the DSS lied on oath in a bid to justify Ubah’s detention, describing it as unfortunate.

  • Court halts EFCC’s bid to seize Patience’s Jonathan’s $5.7m, N2.4b

    Court halts EFCC’s bid to seize Patience’s Jonathan’s $5.7m, N2.4b

    THE Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday suspended proceedings in the hearing of an application seeking permanent forfeiture of $5.7million belonging to wife of former President Goodluck Jonathan, Patience.

    Justice Mojisola Olatoregun stayed proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal challenging the money’s temporary forfeiture.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is praying the court to order that the cash be permanent forfeited to the Federal Government.

    The judge, on April 26, made an interim order forfeiting the money based on an application by EFCC.

    Justice Olatoregun had also ordered the temporary forfeiture of N2,421,953,522.78 found in an Ecobank Nigeria Ltd account numbered 2022000760 in the name of La Wari Furniture and Baths Ltd.

    The commission said the money also belongs to Mrs. Jonathan.

    EFCC’s lawyer Rotimi Oyedepo told the judge yesterday that he was ready to move his application for the money’s forfeiture.

    He said the respondents had filed their counter-affidavits and served him.

    But, Mrs. Jonathan’s lawyer, Chief Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), said he filed an application for stay of proceedings pending the appeal’s determination.

    Counsel for La Wari Furniture and Baths Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) added that once an appeal had been entered, the lower court ought to stay proceedings.

    Besides, he said the Court of Appeal had already fixed the case for hearing on July 5.

    Citing several judicial authorities and Court of Appeal Rules, Ozekhome said it would amount to disrespect for court hierarchy for the judge to proceed with the case where there was a pending appeal.

    According to him, the lower court ceased to have jurisdiction once the appeal was entered and records transferred.

    “It’s the law that once a party to a matter has filed an appeal and the records of proceedings transferred, the lower court ought to wash its hands off the case like Pontius Pilate.

    “The Supreme Court said it’ll amount to judicial impertinence to entertain the matter when there’s a motion pending at the Appeal Court.

    “It’ll amount to embarking on an illegal judicial voyage of discovery,” Ozekhome said.

    But Oyedepo said the court could hear the case as there was no order for stay of proceedings from the Court of Appeal.

    “Your Lordship has jurisdiction to hear this matter. There is no order staying proceedings by the superior court,” he said.

    Oyedepo, however, admitted being served with a motion for stay of proceedings and “a photocopy of what appears to be a hearing notice.”

    Ruling, Justice Olatoregun held that it would be in the interest of justice to await the Court of Appeal’s decision.

    “I have seen the hearing notice issued by the Court of Appeal. I believe it will be in the interest of justice for parties to vent their views at the Court of Appeal.

    “I will, therefore, adjourn this case until 20th of September.”

    Mrs. Jonathan, in the notice of appeal, is praying the court to hold that the law cited by the EFCC in its ex-parte application for the temporarily forfeiture was inapplicable.

    “A judge is bound by the prayers on the motion paper and the court has no jurisdiction to make a case for a party different from that presented by the said party,” the appellant said.

  • Makarfi kicks as Sheriff urges court to shun appeal

    Makarfi kicks as Sheriff urges court to shun appeal

    Apex court hears PDP leadership tussle suit today

    The leadership of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) has urged  the Supreme Court to shun an appeal brought before it by the party’s sacked National Caretaker Committee led by Ahmed Makarfi.

    The PDP’s National Executive Committee (NEC), led by Ali Modu Sheriff (Chairman), Prof. Wale Oladipo (Secretary) said the Makarfi Committee, having been declared illegal by the February 17, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt, lacked the powers to take decisions for the party, including initiating court proceedings in its name.

    The PDP leadership stressed this position in a written argument it made in support of an application it filed on March 21 seeking the striking out of the appeal filed on February 27 by the Markafi Committee against the February 17 Appeal Court’s judgment. The written submission was filed on May 10 in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directive on May 4.

    The PDP leadership is contending that the Makarfi Committee did not obtain the PDP’s authorisation to appeal in its name and on its behalf, because the PDP under the current leadership, was comfortable with the Appeal Court judgment and does not intent to challenge it.

    It contented, in the address written by a group of lawyers, led by Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), that since the Court of Appeal, in its February 17 judgment, declared that the Sheriff-led NEC is the authentic leadership organ of the PDP, the Makarfi-led Committee could no longer pursue an appeal in the party’s name.

    The Sheriff-led PDP leadership argued that the decision of the Makarfi committee to file an appeal in the name of the PDP without its (the party’s) authorisation was not only illegal, it violated the party’s constitution.

    Relying on the provisions of Chapter 5, Articles 35(1), 36(1) and 42(1) of the PDP constitution, it argued that the party, with a corporate personality, could only act through the principal national officer, whose powers and functions are stated in the constitution.

    It referred to a May 18, 2016 judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital territory (FCT) ordering a return to status quo as at May 18, 2016 and the subsequent judgment of the Federal High Court in suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/464/2016 to the effect that only the Sheriff NEC could instruct lawyers for the party, and urged the Supreme Court not to hear the appeal.

    The Sheriff-led PDP leadership noted that it had not by its argument said the Makarfi Committee could not appeal the May 17 judgment of the Appeal Court, having been parties in the case from the trial court, it (the Makarfi Committee) or its members could only appeal as interested parties after first, obtaining the court’s leave to so appeal.

    In the substantive appeal, among other issues,  Sheriff/PDP lawyers urged that the appeal should either be dismissed or struck out because the supposed appellants (Makarfi’s PDP) did not ‎obtain neither the leave of the Court of Appeal nor that of the Supreme Court before filing the appeal which is based on mixed law and facts.

    In a counter argument, the Makarfi Committee, represented by a group of lawyers, led by Wole Olanipekun (SAN), urges the court to discountenance the Sheriff NEC’s arguments and proceed to hear its appeal. It among others, urged the Supreme Court to set aside the Appeal Court’s judgment of February 17.

    In its argument dated May 15,  the Makarfi Committee queried the legitimacy of the application filed by the Sheriff-led NEC and argued that it was not only strange, but intended to frustrate the hearing of the main appeal.

    It argued that it was wrong for Sheriff and others to ask the court not to hear the appeal after briefing Akin Olujinmi (SAN) to represent them in the substantive appeal and filling a respondents’ brief, in which they also made similar arguments in relation to the competence of the appeal.

    Relying on Order 8 Rule 6 (1), (2) and (4) of the Supreme Court’s Rules, the Makarfi Committee faulted the March 15, 2017 letter of the Sheriff-led NEC applying to withdraw the appeal and the subsequent application for its strike out. It argued that since Sheriff and others did not file the appeal, they lacked the right to apply to withdraw it.

    In a response on point of law, filed by Fagbemi on May 18, the Sheriff-led NEC faulted all legal arguments by the Makarfi Committee, urged the court to discountenance its contention and hold that it lacked the locus standi to file an appeal in the name of the PDP, having been sacked by a subsisting judgment.

    On the issue of representation, they explained that while Fagbemi and others were representing the‎ PDP as a party, Olujinmi was leading a team for Sheriff and Oladipo, sued in their personal capacities and representing the National officers, NWC and NEC of the PDP.

    The Makarfi Committee has, however filed papers, seeking to regularise their processes. But, this was done after parties had joined issues and briefs exchanged.

    It was learnt yesterday that the Supreme Court had rescheduled the hearing of the appeal relating to the PDP leadership dispute for today (May 22).

    The court had, on May 4, ordered the filing of the written briefs and adjourned till May 25 for hearing. It could not be ascertained yesterday what informed the court’s decision to bring the date forward.

  • Boy in court over alleged burglary

    Boy in court over alleged burglary

    A 17-year-old boy, who allegedly burgled a residence and stole rice and jewellery valued at N275,000 was on Wednesday appeared at an Ikeja Chief Magistrates’ Court in Lagos.

    The accused (name withheld), who resides at Agege, a suburb of Lagos is charged with burglary and stealing.

    The Prosecutor, Sgt. Raphael Donny, told the court that the offences were committed on April 10, 2017, at 6, Oloko Lane, Agege, Lagos.

    Donny said that the accused burgled the residence of late Alhaja Afusat Amao to steal.

    “The accused stole half bag of rice and gold jewellery all valued at N275, 000, property of the late woman, who died few weeks ago.

    “The accused was apprehended by the members of the vigilance group in the area and he was brought to the police station,” he said.

    He told the court that the offences contravened Sections 278 and 307 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.

    The accused, however, pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    The Chief Magistrate, Mrs Davies Abegunde, granted bail to the accused in the sum of N100, 000, with two sureties in like sum.

    Abegunde adjourned the case until May 31.

  • Italian court intervenes in Bayelsa community’s,oil giant’s dispute

    Italian court intervenes in Bayelsa community’s,oil giant’s dispute

    Friends of the Earth Nigeria and Friends of the Earth Europe have teamed up with a Bayelsa State community, Ikebiri, to drag oil giant ENI before a court in in Milan, Italy, over the pollution of their environment, writes PRECIOUS DIKEWOHA.

    ‘It is frustrating to learn that AGIP accepts responsibility for the Spill but without liability to clean up and pay adequate compensation. The tactics of underestimating spills to reduce damage has been challenged by this historic court case’

    Ikebiri is a community in Bayelsa State. It is made up of several villages. Its main economic activities include palm-wine tapping, canoe carving, fishing, farming, animal trapping and traditional medical practices.

    Its story took a sad turn on April 5, 2010. No thanks to the bursting of an oil pipeline operated by oil giant ENI’s Nigerian operation, the Nigerian Agip Oil Company (NAOC). It burst 250 metres from a creek north of Ikebiri. The spill affected the creek, fishing ponds and trees essential to the local community. It badly damaged the livelihoods of the community.

    Six days after the spill, a joint inspection visit led by NAOC cited “equipment failure” as the cause of the spill.

    The oil giant operates seven wells and eight pipe lines with several flow lines in the area. The leak was closed, and the surrounding polluted area of bush was burnt without the consent of the community. This was a process far below international standard.

    The community approached NAOC/ENI for emergency relief materials and compensation. On April 5, the oil giant released N2 million to the community and on April 18, it added €10,034 for relief materials. As compensation, it offered N4.5 million, which was rejected by the community. The community wants N31.5 million.

    A resident, Emilia Matthew, said: “I am sick and we don’t know what to resort to when experiencing illness. Fishing, which has been our means of livelihood, is now threatened; it is no longer productive due to the river being polluted by oil spills. The fish in our fish ponds in the swamps/bush too have all been killed by crude oil. So, we have lost our fish ponds. The vegetables we plant within the community, some of which are medicinal and we use in treating ourselves are also affected by crude oil.”

    Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Executive Director Nigeria Dr. Godwin Uyi Ojo, at news conference on Tuesday in Lagos, said: “It took six days for NAOC to agree to a joint inspection visit where it was concluded that “equipment failure” caused the spill. NAOC operates seven wells and eight pipelines with several flow lines in the area of Ikebiri. You will be shocked to know that after that visit the leak was closed but the surrounding polluted area of bush was set ablaze in a state of the art clean up technology often deployed by AGIP and without the consent of the local community. No other clean-up has taken place since.

    “It is frustrating to learn that AGIP accepts responsibility for the Spill but without liability to clean up and pay adequate compensation. The tactics of underestimating spills to reduce damage has been challenged by this historic court case. Though NAOC claimed the polluted area is 9 hectares and an estimated 50 barrels of oil leaked, we know from chemical analysis that the polluted area is much wider. It is at least 17.6 hectares wide, while evidence of pollution has also been found by soil sample analysis 2km downstream from the spill site.”

    Ojo added: “The monumental hurdles and the challenges of access to justice on the way of community people includes lack of access to information, high costs of legal cases, sleeping on your rights which limits period of initiating a case, and the cumbersome nature of oil spill cases against transnational companies that could take a lifetime. These impediments on the way of local people to seek access to environmental justice persists hence this court case to serve as deterrent. In the Niger Delta, there are potentially over 1000 cases against oil companies arising from negligence and nuisance from their oil operations. In the case of Ikebiri, AGIP/ENI is considering as cleaned up a land that is still heavily polluted, and offering a paltry sum as compensation to externalise productions costs. The community has lived with this heart retching situation ever since.  Their plight is now the same with other communities of the Niger Delta that live with the impacts of continuous oil spills on their environment, health and livelihoods.

    “As mentioned last week when the case was instituted, the spill could have been managed and stopped from spreading to a huge expanse of the Ikebiri swampland but the nonchalant attitude of the ENI/NAOC created the current mess.”

    Friends of the Earth Europe and the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria are supporting the community’s court case against ENI.

    In the case against AGIP/ENI filed in Milan, Italy, on May 4, the plaintiffs are seeking the clean-up of their community and compensation for the pollution. The King of Ikebiri is the plaintiff, and the lawyers representing them are Luca Saltalamacchia with Chima Williams of ERA/FoE Nigeria.

    Ojo explained that “we feel this case should set the stage for others equally impacted by ENI’s operations to take their destinies in their hands and to provide deterrents to Agip/ENI and other oil companies.”

    He gave recent cases as:  Azuzuama, which happened on July 9, 2015 in which 14 persons were burnt beyond recognition along NAOC’s Tebidabe-Clough Creek pipeline, Etieama community in Nembe Local Government Area and Ayamabele/Kalaba community environment, in Okordia clan, Yenagoa, Bayelsa.

    The ERA boss went on: “This is an unprecedented case in Italy, and its success has been a product of 4 years of painstaking research and documentation and the patience of the Ikebiri people suffering this ordeal this past seven years.  We hope that this case will be successful being the first instance of an Italian company having to face justice in Italy for its actions in destroying the environment overseas. It will help end the impunity and offer hope to other communities that have suffered damages as a result of pollution from oil wells or pipelines operated by Agip/ENI or any other multinational firm operating in the Niger Delta and elsewhere.”

     

  • Confusion as witness dies in court

    Confusion as witness dies in court

    A WITNESS in a land case yesterday slumped and died at an Ikeja High Court, throwing the whole place into confusion.

    He was to testify before Justice O.A. Olayinka.

    It was learnt that before the case was called, the late witness started coughing and gasping for breath. He was said to have stood up to leave the courtroom to take care of himself. He slumped along the corridor and died. He name could not be ascertained.

    An eye witness said: “He was vomiting a lot of blood and onlookers were scared to go near him.

    “He collapsed and died on the corridors of the courtroom before a medical team came in an ambulance to take the body away.

    “His lawyer informed Justice Olayinka of his client’s death and she immediately stopped proceedings for the day.”

    There were clots of blood along the corridor as well as the deceased’s blood-stained shirt and leather slippers.

    The Chief Registrar, who could comment on the matter, was in a meeting with the Chief Judge and Chief Security Officer of the court, when The Nation sought his reaction.

     

  • Alleged N9.79b fraud: Court rejects request for bench warrant on Suswam

    Alleged N9.79b fraud: Court rejects request for bench warrant on Suswam

    •Judge warns ex-governor against absence 

    A Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday rejected a request to issue a bench warrant on former Benue State Governor Gabriel Suswam.

    Justice Gabrial Kolawole, however, warned Suswam not to push the court to a state where it will compel him to attend court.

    The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) on March 27, filed a 32-count charge against Suswam and two others, accusing them of diverting N9,791,602,453.8, part of which was meant for police reform and the Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme (SURE-P).

    The others are the Finance Commissioner during Suswam’s tenure, Omadachi Oklobia and former Accountant, Benue State Government House Administration, Mrs. Janet Aluga.

    They were to be arraigned on the new charge on April 11, but for the absence of Suswam, who was in the custody of the Department for State Services (DSS).

    The development prompted Justice Kolawole to order the DSS to produce him (Suswam), and adjourned to yesterday.

    The DSS released Suswam on May 7. He was in court on Wednesday when his lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN) withdrew the N10 billion rights’ enforcement suit he filed against the DSS, which Justice Kolawole struck out.

    But yesterday, Suswam was not in court. Oklobia and Mrs. Aluga were present. The ex-governor’s lawyer, Miss C.E Ogbuozor, said Suswam was admitted in hospital for hypertension-related ailment, which allegedly arose due to his prolonged stay in the DSS custody.

    She said: “After his release from the custody of the SSS (DSS), he met with us, his lawyers and explained to us that, owing to his detention, he has been unable to keep up with his medical checks or take his medication for a hypertensive medical condition, which he had.

    “Having stayed in detention for over 70 days, he proceeded to see his doctors, who after due examination, advised that he be placed on bed rest and subject to his doctor’s observation.

    “We have also been issued with a report, which we have furnished the prosecution this morning. Out of respect for this court, the lead counsel, Mr. J.B Daudu (SAN), had to bring the first defendant to court yesterday (Wednesday) for his civil matter.

    “Today, we made effort to secure his attendance in court this morning, but unfortunately, his doctors would not oblige us.

    “In view of the foregoing, we sincerely crave the indulgence of the court for an adjournment to enable the first defendant to attend his trial to take his plea and to also prepare on the appropriate plea on each of the 32 counts, which we confirmed were duly served on him personally on May 8, 2017 following the orders of this court,” she said.

    Prosecuting lawyer Aminu Alilu said he was not served with any medical report from the defence.

    He said: “His (Suswam) presence in court yesterday showed that the condition is not as complicated as the counsel presented it.

    “We urge your lordship to invoking Section 131 of the Administration of Criminal Justice (ACJ) Act, by which my Lord is empowered to issue a warrant of arrest on the first defendant, and we so pray.

    “But, we are not opposed to the adjournment since the arraignment cannot go on today in the absence of the first defendant,” Alilu said.

    Lawyers to other defendants, F.R. Onoja (for Oklobia) and Innocent Da’agba (for Aluga) agreed with Miss Ogbuozor and prayed the court not to grant Alilu’s request for a bench warrant on Suswam.

    When a copy of Suswam’s medical report was shown to him, Alilu faulted the document, insisting that the situation requires that a warrant of arrest be issued on the defendant.

    Alilu said: “I just saw the medical report tendered by the first defendant. They said the report was from a private hospital and there ought to be an affidavit by the doctor, who signed it, informing this honourable court, on oath, the ailment of the first defendant stated on the medical report.”

    Justice Kolawole observed that Suswam attended court the previous day.

    The judge, however, faulted Alilu’s argument, noting that he did not support with any judicial authority his argument that a medical report issued by a private hospital, as against a government hospital, must be backed with a supporting affidavit deposed to by the doctor, who signed it.

    Justice Kolawole said Alilu’s argument would not prevent the court from accepting the medical report, dated May 10.

    The judge warned Suswam against being absent in subsequent proceedings, and adjourned till June 19 for arraignment.