The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court discharges 40 over ‘N12b pension scam’

    Court discharges 40 over ‘N12b pension scam’

     •EFCC arrests accused

    FORMER Director of Pension Administration in the office of the Head of Service of the Federation, Teidi Shuaibu and 39 others jointly standing trial for allegedly siphoning N12 billion federal civil servants’ pension funds were yesterday discharged by the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    Teidi, and others were also standing trial for the missing funds.

    In a ruling, Justice Adamu Bello said the court’s action was at the instance of the prosecution who prayed for separate trial of the suspects.

    He said the prosecution had formally withdrawn the old charges against the accused to create room for the filing of fresh ones.

    “This is the only workable option and in the light of the above, the case file will be re-assigned by the authority of the Federal High Court.

    “The 40 accused are hereby discharged and are no more before this court,’’ he said.

    At the resumed hearing, Chief Godwin Obla, the prosecuting counsel, announced that his client gave him an instruction to break up the accused for separate trial.

    “My client has instructed me to withdraw an amended charge dated July 26, 2011 comprising 40 accused persons, to give room for separate trial and good case management.

    “We have filed seven sets of charges pursuant to this instruction and will be applying for permission to substitute the earlier charges with the one filed on March 14.

    “The application is brought pursuant to Sections 155 and 168 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA).

    “My Lord, this is to reflect the extent of the alleged complicity and participation of the related parties,’’ Obla said.

    Mr Sunday Ameh (SAN) led other defendant counsel in the matter to oppose the application.

    They said that the move would erode the progress so far made in the case.

    According to them, the former charges should be left to stand as each accused person understands the allegation against him or her.

    The accused were first arraigned on March 24, 2011, for allegedly defrauding the pension department, Office of the Head of Service of the Federation, of N12 billion pension funds.

    They were arraigned on a 134-count charge.

    Meanwhile, NAN reports that at the close of the proceeding, operatives of the EFCC re-arrested the suspects and took them away.

  • Court orders release of 71-year-old woman’s passport

    A Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday ordered the Commissioner of Police, Special Fraud Unit (SFU), Ikoyi, Mr Tunde Ogunsakin, to release the International Passport of a bed-ridden 71-year-old woman.

    Mrs Clara Oye Otoki was arrested over a family dispute involving her elder brother’s company – Nojovo Farms and Fisheries Limited – where she is a director.

    The company is owned by the late Chief Babasola Rhodes (SAN).

    In an affidavit in support of her application, Mrs Otoki said she had been on sick bed for six months, adding that she is unable to walk and is having excruciating pains across her back, pelvis, thigh bones and muscles.

    The pains, she said, arose from the “complete destruction of the head of the right femur and the acetabulum.”

    The applicant said she underwent surgery in the United Kingdom in 1993 and 1995, adding that her ailment was aggravated when she was asked “to report every now and then” to SFU.

    Following a relapse of her condition, she said she was recommended for another surgery in the United States.

    She is unable to embark on the journey “because of the forceful seizure and continuous retention of her International Passport by the respondents, she said.”

    She sought a declaration that the forceful seizure of her passport and its retention since July 6, last year by SFU without court order is a gross violation of her right to freedom of movement.

    Mrs Otoki urged the court to hold that the police’s seizure of her passport, despite her release on bail to a responsible surety, violates her rights.

    The woman said the development “prevents her from obtaining appropriate medical attention abroad” and has endangered her life.

    She said the rights are guaranteed under Section 33 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    The applicant prayed for a mandatory injunction directing the respondents to release the passport to her forthwith.

    Her lawyer, Oviemuno Obobolo, referred to a Supreme Court case of “Director of SSS vs. Agbakoba,” where it was held that the right to freedom of movement includes the right to hold a passport.

    Justice Mohammed Yinusa ruled that the application has merit.

    “After considering all the issues raised by learned counsel for the applicant, the evidence in support and other exhibits, it is my considered opinion that there is evidence that the right of the applicant has been, is being and is likely to be further infringed upon. The application has merit. The reliefs sought by the applicant are hereby granted as prayed,” Justice Yinusa said.

    Other respondents in the suit are the Investigating Police Officer (IPO), Mr Osong Ekpo and Mr Dauda Olanipekun.

  • Court refuses bank’s plea for extension in Braithwaite’s suit

    ALagos State High Court, Igbosere, has refused to entertain a plea for extension of time by Standard Chartered Bank Nigeria Limited in a N10billion suit filed against it by a lawyer and former Presidential candidate, Dr. Tunji Braithwaite.

    The bank requested for extension in response to Braithwaite’s Motion on Notice, but Justice Doris Okuwobi said the defendant’s prayers would not be heard because it was yet to pay a default fee to the court.

    Standard Chartered’s counsel, Oluwatosin Iyayi, asked for a short date when their application would be considered, by which time they would have paid the penalty for replying out of time.

    The court granted the bank’s prayers.

    Braithwaite had sought a declaration that the bank’s construction of a 14-storey building and a five-level car park at 142 Ahmadu Bello Way/Plot 142 Abutting Elias Close, Victoria Island, Lagos, is unlawful and damaging to his rights.

    He asked for a declaration that the commercial building, which he claimed is now at its 10th floor, constitutes an illegal structure.

    The claimant alleged that the defendant’s Development Permit is illegal, and that the building constitutes a nuisance to him, obliterating his access to light, air and linkages – rights he had enjoyed for 40 years while living in his house.

    He prayed for an order that “the illegal commercial building” be “demolished and pulled down by the defendant at its cost.”

    He also sought general damages of N10billion “for the nuisance caused and inflicted on the claimant by the defendant over a period of years.”

    In a supporting affidavit, the claimant said he needed to make necessary amendment to his Write of Summons, Statement of Claim and Written Statements on Oath because the events on the building have overtaken the earlier processes he filed.

    Braithwaite said he would call three additional witnesses, adding that when his original suit was filed, the defendant was still proposing to build the house. Now, construction has gone to an advanced stage, he said.

    “As at the date hereof…the defendant has now rushed the construction of its illegal structure to the 10th floor level in an attempt to steal a match on the claimant, which act makes it necessary for the claimant to amend his processes and the consequential reliefs being sought,” the claimant said.

    Among others, Braithwaite claimed that he complained that the building, previously occupied by Reliance Bank Limited, had facilities which disturbed him.

    According to him, the defendant’s predecessor had installed some giant electric generating plants directly opposite his house at Plot 158 (No. 9) Elias Close, Victoria Island, with a narrow road of nine metres separating the two properties.

    He said the generating sets were “pumping gases into the living rooms of the claimant’s residence, and also causing deafening noise.”

    Braithwaite said the 14-storey building infringes his fundamental right to access to light as a result of it being in excess of stipulated height, which he said contravened existing guidelines in its host environment.

    The elder statesman averred that the development permit which the defendant purportedly obtained from the state government authorising a mixed development in the area was invalid and unlawful.

    However, the bank in its defence, denied that the building would constitute any nuisance to the claimant.

    The defendant contended that the action is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of court process.

    It urged the court to dismiss the action.

    The bank said the Lagos State government reserves the power and authority, acting by itself or through its ministries, parastatals or agencies to designate/zone all areas within the state as residential, commercial and/or mixed uses.

    It said it obtained the relevant permits from the state government before embarking on the construction.

    Justice Okuwobi adjourned further hearing till April 16.

     

  • Court rules on Osun ruler’s rape case June 4

    Court rules on Osun ruler’s rape case June 4

    A High Court sitting in Osogbo, the Osun State capital, has fixed June 4 for judgment on the case of the alleged rape of a female corps member by the Alowa of Ilowa, Oba Adebukola Alli.

    The monarch has been on trial for about three years for allegedly defiling a 23-year-old corps member, who served in his domain.

    The monarch allegedly committed the offence at his private home in Osogbo.

    Oba Alli denied the allegation.

    He claimed that the victim was his lover and that they had been having sexual relations since they met.

    At the resumed hearing yesterday, counsel to the accused, Mr. E. A. Gbadegesin, said he had filed his written address.

    He said the written address was confirmed by the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP).

    Leading lawyers from the Ministry of Justice, the DPP, Mr. Dapo Adeniji, said he had proofs that the monarch committed the offence and urged the court to expedite the judgment.

    Justice Oyejide Falola fixed June 4 for ruling.

  • Court sets aside Ogun panel’s report

    Court sets aside Ogun panel’s report

    An Abeokuta High Court has set aside the report of the Ogun State Judicial Commission of Inquiry into land allocations, acquisition, sales and concessions. The panel recommended to the government to cancel/revoke the Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) issued to Portal Property and Development Ltd (second applicant in the case).

    Justice Tajudeen Okunsokan also restrained Ogun State Governor and the Attorney-General, their agents, servants or privies from acting on the views and decisions contained in the report of the commission (White Paper) as it concerns and affects the second applicant contained in Ogun State Legal Notice No. 9 of 2012 published in the state gazette of 2012.

    The government of Ogun State had set up the commission to inquire into all land allocations, acquisition of government properties and administration of land policies, rules and regulations between January 2004 and May 29, 2011.

    The commission had recommended to the government in its report (White Paper) that it should amongst others revoke the Certificate of Occupancy issued to Portal Property and Development Ltd, registered as No. 64 at Land Registry.

    Aggrieved by the decisions of the Commission, Architect Lekan Adams and Portal Property & Development Limited, first and second applicants respectively sued the Commission, Ogun State Governor and the state Attorney-General, seeking an order of Certiorari to quash the views and decisions of the commission as it concerned them.

    The applicants prayed the court give an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the respondents, their agents, servants or privies from acting on the views and decisions of Ogun State Government (White Paper) on the report of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry

    They also prayed the court to set aside the report of the commission which recommended the revocation of their C of O.

    In addition, they had prayed the court to restrain the respondents, their agents, privies or servants from doing anything whatsoever prejudicial to their (applicant) interest particularly awarding contract for development of entire Mall Project and ancillary projects connected to Gateway City Development Zone, Isheri, Ogun State.

    The applicants had told the court that after series of meeting and negotiation, they entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the first applicant and the Ogun State Government through its agents, Gateway Holdings Limited which led to the incorporation of a Joint Venture Company (second applicant) for the development of the Gateway City Development Complex at Isheri, Ogun State into an event centre, shopping mall, conference centre and a five star hotel and residential accommodation.

    “The Ogun State Government provided 15.687 hectares of land at Isheri, Ogun State which represent its equity contribution for its 15 per cent shareholding in the second applicant and as a result, a C of O registered as No. 64 at page 64 in Volume 680 at the Land Registry, Abeokuta, Ogun State was issued in favour of the second applicant, while the first applicant and one Otunba Alex Onabanjo hold the remaining 85 per cent shares in the second applicant in trust for potential investors.

    “And due to the fact that huge amount of money was needed for the project, several meetings were held with banks, financial houses and several investment companies in Nigeria and abroad in this regard while the first applicant had spent millions on the project”, it stated.

    The first applicant told the court that on December 17, 2011 some friends drew his attention to a publication on page 30 of THISDAY Newspaper as it affects his C of O.

    He said that without being invited or summoned by the commission, he attended its sitting in company of his counsel, Mr Tunde Adeoye on December 20, 2011, but was told by the Secretary to the commission that his matter was not listed for hearing that day.

    Adams said his counsel subsequently wrote another letter dated December 20, 2011 to the Chairman and secretary of the tribunal, requesting for a date to present his case.

    “The first applicant again without any invitation voluntarily attended the sitting of the first respondent in company of his lawyer on January 17, 2012 to present his case before the commission but the Chairman of the Commission asked him to drop the document he had to prove his case as his case had earlier been closed.

    Adams said he was surprised to read in THISDAY Newspapers of Thursday, March 1, 2012, the views and decision of the Ogun State government (White Papaer) on the First Report of the first respondent.

    The applicants however in seeking their four prayers, claimed that they were not given fair hearing by the Commission, that the Commission lacked jurisdiction to entertain the subject matter based on Clause 8 and 9 of the MoU between Gateway Holdings Ltd and Lekan Adams & Associates made in July 2006.

    In his judgement, Justice Okunsokan granted two out of the four applicants prayer. He, however, refused prayer 1 and 3 which sought for an order of Certiorari to quash the views and decisions of the commission and an order of injunction restraining the respondents, their agents, privies or servants from doing anything whatsoever prejudicial to their (applicant) interest particularly awarding contract for development of entire Mall Project and ancillary projects connected to Gateway City Development Zone, Isheri, Ogun State.

  • Court grants woman’s request for divorce

    Court grants woman’s request for divorce

    A Grade One Area Court in Abuja on Tuesday granted a housewife, Mrs Sadiya Turaki’s request for divorce from her husband, Mustapha.

    The judge, Mr Qaseem Muhammed, granted the divorce following complaints by Sadiya that she had never loved her husband.

    Muhammed said that he granted the divorce because from all indications the marriage was not working.

    Sadiya told the court, “I have never loved him, I was forced to marry him. My heart is elsewhere.

    “I cannot stand being married to him. Since I was forced to marry him three years ago, I have never agreed to live with him.

    “I have been living with my parents. I just moved to his house two weeks ago.

    “I was very young when I was forced to marry him, but now I am older, wiser and educated. I can now stand for myself.”

    Mustapha, a civil servant, of Wuse, prayed the court to grant his wife’s request.

    “Please grant her request because I do not want to force her against her wishes, I want her to be happy.

    “This divorce should not spoil the relationship between us, we will remain brother and sister,” he said.

    He said that the divorce was against his wish, but that he wanted to make his wife happy.

    After the court granted Sadiya’s request, Abdul wished her good luck in the future.

  • Court upholds Okonjo as Obi of Ogwashi-Uku

    The Court of Appeal , Benin Division, has declared the Umu Obi Obahai royal family of Ogwashi-Uku, Delta State, the only family qualified to produce the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku.

    The court also upheld the appointment of the father of the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Prof Chukuka Okonjo, as the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku.

    The court upheld the decision of the High Court of Delta State, Ogwashi-Uku, which sat on the same issue.

    Okonjo comes from the Umu Obi Obahai royal line of Ogwashi-Uku.

    The Court of Appeal upheld nine of the 10 reliefs sought by the Umu Obi Obahai royal line, including the issue of the family that can produce the Obi.

    The judgment endorsed the position of the Obahai family that succession to the throne of the Obi of Ugwashi Uku is hereditary by primogeniture and that the last validly installed Obi of Ugwashi Uku was Obahai.

    It also confirms that Dieyi, the forefather of the Dieyi family, which challenged the Obahai position was never an Obi but a mere regent, who held the throne in trust because Obahai’s children were minors at the time of his death.

    A statement by Okonjo’s spokesperson Law Okolobi said the council was pleased that the truth has been confirmed and justice carried out.

    The statement added that the Obi is convinced that the judgment is a victory for the people of Ogwashi-Uku.

    Obi Obahai reigned from 1870 to 1882. Since his demise, the regency prevailed until 22 years ago when his descendants decided to take back the stool.

    The defendants contended that the monarchy had changed hands severally and, having been gazetted by the government, the stool should remain with the Dieyi Family.

    This prompted the plaintiffs, especially the Okonjos, to go to court.

    “His Majesty, the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku, Prof Chukuka Okonjo and the Obi-in-Council, are very pleased that the truth in this matter has been confirmed and justice served.

    “It is the Obi’s conviction that the judgment is a victory for the entire people of Ogwashi-Uku,” the statement reads.

  • Court grants perpetual injunction against Maina’s arrest

    Court grants perpetual injunction against Maina’s arrest

    The embattled Chairman of the disbanded Pension Reform Task Force, Mr. Abdulrasheed Maina, scored a big victory against the Senate on Wednesday as a Federal High Court granted a perpetual injunction restraining his arrest.

    The court also set aside an earlier warrant of arrest issued on him.

    According to Justice Adamu Bello, who delivered the judgment in the enforcement of Fundamental Human Right suit instituted by Maina, the verdict is pegged on the ground that the Senate did not follow due process in issuing the warrant of arrest.

    He also noted that the Senate failed to annex all necessary documents to aid the dismissal of Maina’s request before the court.

    However, Bello cautioned against misreading his judgment as an affirmation that the Senate lacks the powers to investigate or summon any person to give evidence regarding any subject matter under investigation.

    He stated that the injunction only has to do with the warrant of arrest being set aside.

    In the suit, Maina dragged the Senate, Senate President, and the Clerk of the Senate, before the court.

    Joined in the suit are the Senate Committee on Establishment and Public Service, Senate Committee on State and Local Government Administration, the Inspector General of Police, Sen. Alloysius Etuk, Chairman, Senate Committee on Establishment and Public Service, Sen. Kabiru Gaya, Chairman, Senate Committee on State and Local Government Administration.

    He asked the court to quash the purported report of the Senate committee’s resolutions and declare the warrant issued for his arrest as unconstitutional, null and void.

  • Supreme Court to rule on Ogboru’s appeal June 21

    The Supreme Court yesterday fixed June 21 to rule on the appeal by the candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) on the Delta State governorship election in April 2011, Great Ogboru.

    Ogboru asked the court to set aside its March 21, last year judgment, which affirmed Emmanuel Uduaghan of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as the winner of the election.

    Ogboru’s counsel, Dickson Osuala, said the Supreme Court was wrong to strike out his client’s initial appeal against Uduaghan’s election, even as it agreed that the decision of the Court of Appeal was a nullity.

    The counsel said the Supreme Court should have heard it on its merit, or made a consequential order remitting the petition to the governorship election petition tribunal.

    Having declared that the lower court judgment was a nullity, he said the proper order to make was to hear Ogboru’s appeal or remit the case back to the lower court for fresh hearing.

    But the court drew Osuala’s attention to the fact that Ogboru’s initial counsel Sebastine Hon (SAN) had earlier filed and withdrawn a similar application and that the new application would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.

    Osuala told the court that Hon withdrew the application without the authority of his client and under suspicious circumstances.

    “The applicant/appellant brought to the knowledge of this court that they never instructed Hon to withdraw the appeal. Mr. Hon misrepresented the position of the appellant,” he said.

    The head of the Supreme Court panel of justices, Justice Ibrahim Tanko, said the apex court did not agree with Ogboru that the decision of the Court of Appeal was a nullity.

    He also warned Osuala not to cast aspersions on Hon and that as a lawyer he had the right to do his client’s case as he deemed fit.

    He said: “I was on the panel and I happened to write the lead judgment and there is nowhere in my judgment that I said the appeal succeeded. What I said was that the preliminary objection sustained, and the appeal struck out. In law, what is the effect of striking out?

    “The decision of the lower court was a nullity based on some things that were not done, not because of any issue raised in the appeal,” he added

    In his preliminary objection, Uduaghan‘s counsel Wole Olanipekun maintained that Hon has the right to withdraw the appeal.

    He said: “A counsel who is briefed to handle any matter is dominus litis – he is not the steward or servant of the client. When he is in court, he does not need the authority of the client to make a compromise or concession.

    “May the day never come when the counsel will have to look over his shoulders to get instructions from the client before making any move in court.” He stated

    PDP’s counsel Mrs J.O Adesina (SAN) and the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC’s)counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) agreed with Olanipekun and called on the court to dismiss the case and award cost against Ogboru.

    According to Adesina, so far Hon had the authority to represent Ogboru, whatever decision he took is binding on the appellant.

    Ikpeazu said the applicant proceeded as if there was no proceeding on October 15, last year, the day that Hon withdrew the application to set aside the judgment, he ought to have first set aside that which had transpired.

    “Without doing that, the concession made by Hon and the order made by my Lords following that withdrawal remained binding on the applicant.” He stated

    On point of law, Osuala replied that it was not the law that he must first set aside the earlier order striking out the suit.

    According to him, since the earlier application was struck out, his client had the right to come back to court.

    He also informed the court that Ogboru had written to the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to protest the withdrawal of the application by Hon.

    The Supreme Court thereafter adjourned to June 21 to rule on the application.

     

  • Court awards N5m damages against police for illegal detention

    A Lagos  High Court, Ikeja  has declared as illegal and unconstitutional the continuous detention of one Ogbeide Oyakhire alleged to have stolen two vehicles imported by his cousin.

    The court, therefore, ordered the immediate release of Oyakhire who has been in the police detention since 2011.

    Justice I.O. Kasali made the declaration while in ruling on an application brought pursuant to Order 11 rule 3 of the  fundamental human rights enforcement procedures 2009 by  Oyakhire  against Lagos State Commissioner of Police.

    Justice Kasali awarded N5million jointly and severally against the respondents as general damages for the unlawful violation of the applicant’s right.

    The applicant through his lawyer, Mr Emmanuel Ogbeche had sued the Lagos State Police Commissioner and two others  after several efforts to get his freedom from police detention failed.

    Other defendants in the suit are the Deputy Commissioner of Police (SCIB), Panti, Yaba and SUPOL Bamgboshe of D7, Human Rights (SCIB), Panti, Yaba.

    The trial judge declared that the continuous detention of Oyakhire for over one year is degrading, unlawful, illegal and a gross violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed under sections 34(1) 35(1) and 41(1) of 1999 Constitution as amended.

    The judge also gave a mandatory order compelling the respondents, their officers, agents, servants or privies to produce the applicant before the court in order to be  granted  bail conditionally or unconditionally.

    She however refused to grant the applicants request for an order  restraining the respondents, whether by themselves, their officers, agents, servants or privies from further inviting, arresting  or detaining him.

    She said that the respondents are at liberty to investigate and carry on their duty as police officers without infringing on the fundamental right of the applicant.

    Ogbeche had stated in the application that the applicant was arrested and detained by the police on November 20, 2011 for an allegation of stealing two vehicles, a Jaguar and a Honda CRV Jeep inputted by his cousin brother, who is based in America.

    Ogbeche said the vehicles in question were left in the custody of Oyakhire by his cousin and when a pressing need arose for the family to take care of, it was mutually agreed for the cars to be sold to enable them offset the financial burden.

    “It was after this, he said, that our client was apprehended and incarcerated for stealing the cars, since November 20, 2011 at the Nigeria Police Station, Panti, Yaba, Lagos without being charged to court.

    He said the complainant was said to have refused to shown up after the first day he lodged the complaint.”

    He  also complained that despite court ruling that his client be release from detention, the police had refused to do so.

    Ogbeche said efforts to serve the police with the enrolment order has proved abortive as they have bluntly refused to accept the said order.