The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court to rule today on Leadership reporters’ application

    Justice Usman Musale of the Abuja High Court, Kubwa, will today rule on whether or not to hear a motion seeking a stay of proceedings in the trial of two journalists with the Abuja-based Leadership newspapers.

    The judge delayed ruling till today after hearing arguments from lawyers representing parties in the case of forgery against the paper’s Group News Editor, Tony Amokeodo and Correspondent, Chibuzo Ukaibe.

    By the ruling, the judge is expected to decide whether or not it was proper to hear the motion for a stay of proceedings because of a subpoena ad testificandum (summons to testify) issued on behalf of the defence on President Goodluck Jonathan.

    Prosecution lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), yesterday told the court that he was ready to proceed with the trial.

    But the lead defence lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), informed the court that a subpoena personally signed by the trial judge was served on the Presidency via the Ministry of Justice.

    The lawyer said he had filed a motion on notice seeking an order for an indefinite suspension of proceedings in the case, pending the end of Jonathan’s tenure to enable him obey the subpoena and testify as a defence witness.

    He said the motion was informed by the fact that the accused persons’ fundamental right to fair hearing would not be observed by the court because their application for the issuance and service of subpoena on the President had not been granted by the court.

    Falana said: “By virtue of Section 308 of the Constitution (as amended), this honourable court lacks the vires (powers) to issue and cause to be served a subpoena ad testificandum on the President …to testify as a witness for the accused in this case.

    “The accused persons are inhibited from obtaining the attendance of the President …to testify as a witness for the accused persons in this case.”

    The lawyer cited Section 36 (b) of the Constitution to show the need for the accused to have sufficient time and materials for their defence.

    He said there should be a level-playing field before the court…”

     

  • Court jails man 20 years for rape

    A  24-year-old man, Nnauka Okoro, has been sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment for rape.

    Okoro, an indigene of Abiriba, Bende Local Government Area of Abia State was found guilty of raping, stealing and assaulting his victim, a 27-year-old lady, who came to visit her brother, who was his neighbour.

    The prosecutor, Inspector Sunday Asuquo, told the Aba North Chief Magistrate’s Court that the accused on July 4 at Royal Palm Area, Ogbor Hill, Aba, assaulted, stole and raped his victim; an offence he said was punishable under Section 355, 390 and 358 of the Nigerian Criminal Code.

    Asuquo urged the court to take appropriate legal action to ensure that the complainant was not denied justice.

    Okoro pleaded guilty to the charges but begged the court for leniency.

    The Magistrate, K. I Udo, gave the accused 10 years for rape, five years for stealing and five years for assault.

    The Magistrate ordered that the stolen items be returned to the complainant.

    A family source, who pleaded for anonymity, narrated how the incident happened.

    He said: “The lady came from Lagos to visit her brother who lives at Ogbor-Hill.

    “On that day, the accused disguised himself and attacked the victim when she came out to the corridor to do some chores.

    “He pushed her into the room, threatening to shoot her if she did not comply . She initially refused, but the guy stabbed her on the cheek with a dagger.

    “The guy defiled her and she stabbed him in the lower part of his body with the same dagger.

    “He stole some valuables from the house before fleeing. The victim called her brother who alerted the police. They instituted a search operation and later saw the guy (Okoro) bleeding with all the things he had stolen from the house, including the materials he used to disguise himself.”

    The source, who hailed the ruling, called for more stringent penalties for people found guilty of rape.

     

     

  • Court to rule July 25 in suit against PDP

    Court to rule July 25 in suit against PDP

    An Abuja High Court has fixed ruling for July 25 on a motion seeking to stop the planned National Convention of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    Presiding judge, Justice Suleiman Belgore, chose the date yesterday after listening to arguments by Jibrin Okutepa (SAN), for the plaintiffs and Emeka Etiaba, for the PDP.

    The plaintiffs: Abba Yale,Alh. Yahaya Sule and Bashir Maigudu are praying the court for an order of interlocutory injunction,to restrain the party’s National Chairman, Bamanga Tukur and other officers, from holding the scheduled “special convention”,which date was announced by Chairman of the Committee, Prof. Jerry Gana.

    The plaintiffs, apart from seeking to restrain Tukur and acting members of the party’s NWC, are also urging the trial court to set aside or nullify all steps and processes that led to the appointment of the latter as national officers of the party.

    The plaintifs also want the court to restrain Tukur “from performing any functions or duties assigned to the National Working Committee of the Defendant, following the resignation and removal of all members of the National Working Committee of the Defendant set out in article 29 (1) (b)-(1) of the constitution…pending the hearing and determination of this case.”

    Yesterday, Okutepa observed that the resignation of the party’s National Working Committee members was an affront on the integrity of the court.

    He argued that since the case was still pending in court, the PDP ought to have allowed it to be decided by the court, rather than proceed to appoint members to act in the stead of those that resigned.

    “The PDP chose to pick unqualified people to constitute the NWC,which was initially composed by equally unqualified members,who resigned.

    “A lot of injuries have been done by PDP,not to itself alone,but to the administration of justice. No person should be seen to be disparaging the court.

    “The defendant is not well-constituted and so cannot function” he submitted, adding that the action was deliberately taken to”undermine and disrespect the authority and power of the court”.

    In his counter argument, Etiaba urged the court to dismiss the entire suit,saying that former NWC members of the PDP resigned their positions,and the party,”as a political party, sought to move on in a lawful manner,and in line with the constitution.”

    Etiabat, who prayed the court to take cognisance of the fact that the PDP never sacked any of the former national officers, also argued for the motion’s dismissal.

     

  • Ibori’s $15m bribe cash: Court decides owner Sept 20

    Ibori’s $15m bribe cash: Court decides owner Sept 20

    Who owns the $15million bribe allegedly offered a former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, by ex-Delta State Governor James Ibori?

    This riddle will be solved on September 20 by Justice Gabriel Kolawole of a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja

    According to a statement by EFCC’s Head of Media and Publicity Wilson Uwujaren, the judge will deliver judgment on the ownership of the bribe cash, which is the subject of a legal tussle between the anti-graft commission and the Delta State government.

    The Delta State government is claiming ownership of the money.

    But the EFCC had in July last year approached the court through an ex- parte application, requesting an order forfeiting the Ibori bribe cash, which had been in the vaults of the Central Bank of Nigeria for more than five years, to the Federal Government as unclaimed proceed of crime.

    The statement said: “Following the application, the court on July 24, last year, ordered the EFCC to publish an interim order of forfeiture in a national newspaper (Thisday), alerting any one with claim to the said money to state such claims within 14 days, three parties, including the Delta State Government indicated interest.

    “While others have since abandoned their claim to the bribe sum, the Delta State government continues to pursue its claim.

    “At the resumed hearing of the case yesterday, the EFCC closed its case, urging Justice Kolawole to dismiss the claim by the Delta State government to the $15million bribe and order the final forfeiture of the sum to the Federal Government, in line with provisions of Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act, 2006.

    “It submitted that the Delta State government’s claim to the bribe cash lacked merit as the same government had in 2007 instituted an action against the Commission and the Attorney-General of the Federation, stating that Ibori should not be investigated and that the state had lost no money from its treasury.

    The counsel to the EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs, said: “My Lord, it is too late for the Delta State Attorney General to lay claim to this money because of his action which he instituted against the Commission saying the governor should not be investigated.”

    “Jacobs went on to reveal that in paragraph 10 of the affidavit deposed in the said case by the Delta State Attorney-General, it was stated that the state Accountant-General, after a thorough investigation, had concluded that no money was lost and that they have no complaint of any missing money.

    “The EFCC counsel averred that the Commission having unequivocally stated that the money was given as a bribe and that no one has come up to claim ownership, Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences has given the court power to order the final forfeiture of the money to the Federal Government.”

  • Court jails five Boko Haram members for life

    Court jails five Boko Haram members for life

    In the first major decision on cases involving Boko Haram members, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja yesterday sentenced four members of the sect to life imprisonment. One bagged 10 years in jail.

    Justice Bilikisu Aminu convicted the Boko Haram members on three of the five counts brought against them. One member was freed.

    Those sentenced to life imprisonment are Shuaibu Abubakar, Salisu Ahmed, Umar Babagana-Umar and Mohamed Ali.

    Umar Ibrahim bagged 10 years. Musa Adam (43 years and father of seven) was freed for lack of evidence.

    The six were arraigned on a five-count charge in 2011 following the April 8, 2011 bombing of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) office in Suleja, Niger State. Sixteen people died in the attack. Many others were injured.

    They were also charged with the July 10, 2011 explosions at the All Christians Fellowship, Suleja in which three people were killed and others injured; the March 3, 2011 explosion at a political rally in Suleja, where three people died; and the May 23, 2011 explosion in Dakina Village, Bwuari, Abuja, in which three policemen were killed.

    The accused were charged with engaging in illegal training in weapons handling and unlawful possession of weapons for the purpose of engaging in terrorism.

    They were charged under Section 15(2) and (3) of the Economic and Financial Crimes (EFCC) Act.

    Justice Aliyu discharged the convicts on the charges relating to the explosions at the All Christians Fellowship and the killing of policemen in Dakina on the grounds that the prosecution failed to provide convincing evidence to support the charges.

    In relation to the other charges, the judge held that the prosecution lacked sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the convicts.

    She freed Adam on the grounds that the prosecution failed to link him with the offences.

    Justice Aliyu said those sentenced to life imprisonment “used explosives meant for blasting rocks for mining purposes, to kill human beings who had done nothing against them.

    “Human life is sacred. There is no human life that is more sacred than the other. The convicts have shown lack of respect for human life. They deserve to be removed from the society,” the judge held before pronouncing the sentence.

    In respect of Umar Ibrahim, who got 10 years, the judge observed that going by the evidence led by the prosecution, he merely served as an errand boy for others, who engaged in the illegal weapon training.

    Justice Aliyu held that Ibrahim was culpable for aiding the illegal trainees as he could have refused to run errands for them if he was not in support of their activities.

    The judge said: “In the case of the sixth accused person, he was neither directly involved in terrorist acts nor trained as a terrorist; he was misled to be an errand boy.

    “His brother, the first accused person (Shuaibu) used him to take food to Boko Haram training camp in Suleja; he is quite young and has life ahead of him.

    “In view of the plea from his lawyer, Mr Kevin Okoro, the court is persuaded to commit the sixth accused person (Ibrahim) to 10 years in prison.

    “For the rest of the accused persons, the court is satisfied with the evidence brought against them. In most of the charges, the prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt why they should be convicted.

    “It is clear that Abubakar, Ahmed, Babagana-Umar, and Ali are liable to the charges of causing death to several and injury to many others through their willful terrorist acts.

    “It is also proven by the prosecution that the above four accused persons are members of Boko Haram and have undergone training to handle weapons and explosives for the purpose of causing death of innocent people.

    “The convicts, minus the sixth accused person, used explosive materials used in blasting rocks on fellow human beings; those who got no defence.

    “There is no human life that is worthier than the other. These convicts have deliberately used the explosives in the most brutal manner against other Nigerians.

    “In the circumstance, the first to fourth accused persons are guilty as charged and are sentenced to life imprisonment while the sixth accused is sentenced to 10 years in prison.

    “For the fifth accused person, Musa Adam, his only offence was that he was a friend of Bashir Madalla, the leader of the sect, Madalla Chapter.

    “The evidence brought against him is not strong because the charges did not link him to have committed any terrorist act with the rest accused person.

    “In his defence, he explained how he warned Bashir Madalla, with whom they were teaching Islamic religion together to refrain from activism.”

    Speaking after the judgment, Adam said he was overwhelmed with the turn of events. He said words could not explain the joy he felt on being discharged and acquitted.

    Adam, who said he is an Islamic teacher, recalled that he warned Shuaibu Abubakar when he accepted the doctrine of Boko Haram and decided to team up with them.

    He said the outcome of the case should teach people that “our religions do not allow the killing of innocent souls”.

    He said people should learn to live within the teachings of their religions and learn to tolerate others’ beliefs.

     

  • Fifth woman Supreme Court Justice takes oath

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Aloma Mukhtar, yesterday inaugurated the nation’s fifth female Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun.

    She urged the new Justice to be guided by her conscience in the discharge of her duties.

    She advised the new Justice to continue to exhibit the good character, which informed her elevation from the Court of Appeal.

    “I must say that you have a very heavy responsibility on your shoulder. You must therefore strive hard to discharge your duties in accordance with the oath of office you have just subscribed to.

    “I therefore charge My Lord, Hon Justice Kekere-Ekun to be dedicated and discharge your duties without fear of favour, affection or ill-will.”

    The CJN also reminded other judges that they must do justice to the satisfaction of not just the parties in a case but the public as well.

    President Goodluck Jonathan recently approved the elevation of Justice Kekere-Ekun following her recommendation by the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    The Senate confirmed her appointment on June 26.

  • Court orders Rivers PDP committee to stay action

    A Rivers State High Court in Port Harcourt has urged the State Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) evaluation committee, led by Chima Boms, to stay action on the proposed investigation into the performances of Governor Rotimi Amaechi and other party members.

    The PDP leadership, led by Felix Obuah, constituted a Performance and Evaluation Committee to probe some of their members who had held or is holding political office within and outside the state from 2003.

    Those to be investigated included governors, commissioners, lawmakers, governor’s aides, among others.

    Amaechi, however, got a court injunction to stop the committee from conducting the investigation.

    The governor sued the party, Boms, Obuah and the party secretary, Ibiba Walter.

    The defendants filed processes challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter.

    Justice GodPower Aguma yesterday urged all parties to maintain the status quo, until the issue of jurisdiction is determined.

    Obuah’s counsel Dike Udenna insisted that the subject matter was a party affair, adding that the court has no powers to entertain it.

    But Amaechi’s counsel Ifedayo Adedipe argued that the court has the power to hear the matter.

    Justice Aguma said: “When a suit is brought before the court, the court is empowered to be in control, until the issue of jurisdiction is determined.

    “The law says that when a matter is in court, parties should not go ahead to do anything. My views about issues of jurisdiction are that when it is raised in a matter and it is not first determined before going into the main case, the essence of coming to court would be an effort in futility.

    “All parties should maintain the status quo, until the issue of jurisdiction is determined.”

    He adjourned the case till July 30.

  • Court holds that alleged bomber of media houses has case to answer

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja yesterday held that Mustapha Umar, being tried for allegedly attempting to bomb a building occupied in Kaduna by three media houses has a case to answer.

    The judge, in a ruling, dismissed the no-case submission made by the accused person after the prosecution closed its case.

    Umar, had in his no-case submission, argued that the prosecution failed to make out a prima facie case against him.

    He also argued that all evidence led by the prosecution did not link him to the charges preferred against him

    His lawyer, Nureini Sulaiman prayed the court to set his client free.

    The judge upheld the prosecution’s counter argument that it has led sufficient evidence establishing a prima facie case against the accused person.

    The judge called on him to open his defence.

    Umar, a suspected boko haram member, is charged with terrorism related offences over the explosion which partly damaged the building -SOJ Plaza .

    The building on Kontagora Road, Kaduna, is occupied by Thisday, the Sun and the Moment newspapers.

    Following the judge’s ruling, Umar testified yesterday as the only defence witness. He denied the allegations against him.

    He denied the confessional statement he made in a video evidence tendered by the prosecution.

    Umar said the video, where he admitted the charge, was doctored by his interrogators, who he accused of excluding where he was tortured and compelled to confessing to the crime.

    Justice Ademola has adjourned to September 30 for parties to adopt their final written submissions.

     

  • Court voids appointment of Service Chiefs

    Court voids appointment of Service Chiefs

    Justice Adamu Bello of the Federal High Court, Abuja yesterday voided the appointment of the nation’s three Service Chiefs.

    He declared illegal and unconstitutional the appointment of the Chief of Army Staff, the Chief of Air Staff and the Chief of Naval Staff by the President without “first seeking and obtaining the confirmation of the National Assembly”.

    The judge granted an order restraining “the President from further appointing Service Chiefs for the federation without first obtaining the confirmation of the National Assembly”.

    The judgment was in a suit instituted in 2008 by rights activist Festus Keyamo.

    Keyamo argued that side-stepping the constitutional requirement of the National Assembly in the appointment of Service Chiefs began under former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

    He stated that subsequent administrations have adopted the illegal practice.

    By implication, such appointments made before now without the confirmation of the National Assembly were unconstitutional.

    Keyamo sought a determination of the following questions:

    •Whether by the combined interpretation of the provisions of Section 218 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and Section 18 of the Armed Forces Act, Cap. A.20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, the President can appoint Service Chiefs without the confirmation of the National Assembly first sought and obtained; and

    •whether Section 18 (1) and (2) of the Armed Forces Act, Cap. A.20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 is not in conformity with the provision of the 1999 Constitution so as to fall within the category of existing laws under Section 315 (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, that the President, may, by order, modify its text, to bring it into conformity with the provisions of the Constitution.

    The lawyer also sought a declaration that:

    • the appointment of Service Chiefs without the confirmation of the National Assembly is illegal, unconstitutional and void;

    •Section 18 (1) & (2) of the Armed Forces Act, Cap. A.20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, is in conformity with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution so as not to fall within the category of existing laws under Section 315 (2) of the Constitution that the President may, by order, modify its text to bring it into conformity with the provisions of the Constitution; and

    •an order restraining the President from further appointing Service Chiefs without first obtaining the confirmation of the National Assembly.

    Justice Bello upheld his arguments; answered the questions in his favour and granted his prayers.

  • Court orders Diya, others to pay N5.5m for assaulting ex-worker

    A Lagos High court, Ikeja, presided over by Justice Opeyemi Oke, yesteday ordered former Chief of General Staff (CGS), Gen. Oladipo Diya, and other directors of his company to pay N5.5million as compensation for assaulting and battering Mr. Oluwatosin Onamade in 2008.

    Onamde was a former worker at Diya’s company.

    He had sued Gen. Diya, his firm, LOTAD Funeral Services Limited, and four directors of the company for assault and battering. The directors are: Kehinde Diya, Dele Obakoya, Emmanuel Ilori and Dele Oyesanya.

    Delivering judgment yesterday, Justice Oke held Diya, LOTAD Funeral Services Limited and the four directors of the company “jointly and severally” liable for the assault and battering of the claimant.

    The judge also held that the actions of the defendants amounted to acts of impunity.

    “The actions of the defendants are condemnable; it is an arbitrary use of power,” Justice Oke said.

    She ordered the defendants to immediately return the claimant’s belongings, which were unlawfully seized from him. They include a Mercedez Benz 190 model with its keys, one HP laptop DV 6000, wedding ring and a Rolex wristwatch.

    The judge also ordered Diya and the other defendants to return to Onamade a bag containing N72,000 cash, personal documents/credentials, complimentary cards, file and a seal stamp.

    Other items to be returned to the claimant are: a Reltel Nokia mobile phone, 6280 Nokia phone, N76 Nokia phone and two wooden caskets.

    Justice Oke averred that the notice of resignation given to the claimant by the management of LOTAD Funeral Services Limited was a breach of the six-month notice provided for in the parties’ terms of agreement.

    “If they had given him the notice six months earlier, the claimant would have had no choice other than to pack his things and leave,” she said.