The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court orders forfeiture of oil bunkering ship to govt

    Court orders forfeiture of oil bunkering ship to govt

    • Arraignment of crew members today

    A private security outfit, Tantita Security Services Nigeria Limited (TSSNL), has won another battle in the war against oil theft in the Niger Delta region.

    In less than one week, Tantita, operated by Chief Government Ekpemupolo (aka Tompolo), has secured the forfeiture of two illegal bunkering vessels to the Federal Government.

    Two Federal High Courts sitting in Abuja have ordered the forfeiture of MT Kali and MT Harbor Spirit to the government.

    The courts also ordered the sale of the stolen crude oil contained in the impounded ocean-going equipment by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).

    The courts directed that the proceeds from the sales be deposited by NNPCL in an interest-yielding account to be determined by Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court.

    The two vessels were arrested by operatives of TSSNL in conjunction with the special task force set up by the Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Emmanuel Ogalla.

    The MT Kali was arrested while siphoning crude oil from Pennington Oil Field of the Anglo-Dutch energy giant, Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC), in Bayelsa State, on January 11.

    Twenty crew members, including community boys’ accomplices, were arrested in the operation.

    Investigations into the arrest of MT Kali were intensified as operatives of Tantita apprehended MT Harbor Spirit on February 4.

    The Moldovian vessel was caught stealing crude oil from Sengana oilfields in the coastal axis of Bayelsa State.

    Delivering an interim order of forfeiture in the case filed by Inspector General of Police (IGP) Kayode Egbetokun, Justice J. K. Omotosho yesterday ordered that MT Harbor Spirit and its content be forfeited to the Federal Government pending when any party might show cause why the order should not be made final within six months.

    According to the certified true copy (CTC) of the order obtained by our correspondent, the court directed that an affidavit of compliance with its order be filled before it within 72 hours after the sale of the confiscated petroleum products found in the ship.

    Read Also: Lagos begins prosecution of pedestrians crossing highways

    A five-count charge was slammed against the vessel and its crew in the case.

    The charges were deposed to by Mr. Idris Abdullahi Mohammed, a Chief Superintendent of Police (CSP), on behalf of IGP’s Special Task Force on Petroleum and Illegal Bunkering (IGP-STFPI), headed by Mr. Lot Lantoh Garba, an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP).

    A sister Federal High Court in Abuja, in an earlier landmark judgment, ordered the forfeiture of MT Kali and its content to the federal authorities.

    The police, in the charge between the IGP v. MT Kali & 22 others, had arraigned the vessel and its crew members before Justice J. O. Abdulmalik.

    The judge also granted the motion for the interim forfeiture of MT Kali and its content to the Federal Government.

    This is the first time in recent time when oil thieves and their barons are being prosecuted and brought to justice.

  • Court dismisses police objection against Fubara’s CoS

    Court dismisses police objection against Fubara’s CoS

    Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt has dismissed preliminary objection by the Nigeria Police, challenging its jurisdiction to hear the fundamental rights’ suit filed by Edison Ehie, the Chief of Staff (CoS) to Governor Siminalayi Fubara.

    The court told the counsel for the police, Celestine Dickson, that his preliminary objection lacked merit.

    The presiding judge, Justice Sika Aprioku, in his ruling, assumed jurisdiction of the matter and held that the none joinder of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) in a matter that the Commissioner of Police was a party to, could not render the suit incompetent.

    The judge said the application by the police lacked merit and dismissed it with a cost of N100,000 in favour of Ehie.

    Aprioku also granted the prayers of Ehie’s lawyer, Damian Okoro, restraining the police from arresting, detaining, harassing or inviting Ehie based on the allegations contained in the suit filed by Martin Amaewhule, linking the Chief of Staff to the destruction of the hallowed chambers of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

    Read Also: Be patient with us, Speaker Abbas appeals to Nigerians

    The judge said: “The preliminary objection raised on the issue of jurisdiction lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.

    “That a declaration be and is hereby granted restraining the respondents howsoever from arresting the applicant based on the trumped up charge in charge number FHR/A BJ/CR/25/2024 used as a tool to settle political scores and vendetta against the applicant at the behest and instigation of Martins Amaewhule, over the burning and destruction of the hallowed chamber of the Rivers State House of Assembly is illegal, unwarranted, unconstitutional and constitutes an infringement against applicant’s fundamental rights.

    “An order of injunction be and is hereby granted restraining the first and second respondents whether by themselves or through their subordinates, agents, privies, or any person howsoever described from inviting, demanding the applicant’s attendance at the first and second respondents’ offices or anywhere harassing, intimidating, arresting, detaining the applicant in connection with the arson on the Rivers State House of Assembly in gross contravention to the applicant’s rights to personal liberty.”

  • Court remands 16 BDC operators in Rivers

    Court remands 16 BDC operators in Rivers

    The Magistrate Court sitting in Port Harcourt, Rivers State has remanded 16 Bureau de Change operators at the Correctional Centre for unlawful business.

    The court held that their action violated  the Banks and Other Financial Institution Act of 2020.

    The decision followed an ex parte application brought by the police asking for time to complete their investigation and charge the suspect to the appropriate court.

    The Presiding Magistrate Alatuwor Fubara adjourned the matter to March 7, 2024.

    The operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the police had raided BDC operators along the GRA and Rumuola axis of Port Harcourt last week and arrested many of them.

    The EFCC and policemen were spotted in six trucks running after the BDC operators, who were fond of gathering around the Presidential Hotel.

    Read Also: Senate targets six-year single tenure for CBN Govs, limits Ways, Means borrowing

    The Chairman of Bureau de Change Operators in the State, Sanni Saka, had lamented that over 100 of his members, including himself were nabbed by operatives of the anti-graft agency.

    Saka said his members were not responsible for the higher exchange rate of the Dollar against the Naira and called for their release.

  • Court sets March 18 for hearing in CSOs’ case against Rivers lawmakers

    Court sets March 18 for hearing in CSOs’ case against Rivers lawmakers

    The Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt has set March 18 to hear a case filed by the Rivers State Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) against the 27 lawmakers led by Speaker Martin Amaewhule.

    The CSOs in the suit are seeking judicial interpretation of Section 109 of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

    The presiding judge, Justice Stephen Dalyop Pam, adjourned the matter following the ongoing Judges Conference.

    CSOs argued in their suit that the 27 lawmakers should vacate their seats for defecting from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Read Also: Nwagua assures Rivers United  will  make quarter-finals

    Also, the Appeal Court sitting in Port Harcourt yesterday granted a request by some Rivers elders led by Chief Arabs Sara-Igbe and nine others to serve the Martin Amaewhule-led lawmakers through substituted service.

    The elders are among others asking the court to declare the peace agreement signed by Governor Siminalayi Fubara and other stakeholders in Abuja as unconstitutional.

    The three-man panel of justices led by Justice Oluwayemisi Daudu, also granted accelerated hearing in the matter and adjourned the case to April 8.

    On January 23, a similar suit was struck out in the state High Court presided over by Justice Chiwendu Nworgu for lack of jurisdiction.

  • Court voids indefinite suspension of FADAMA coordinator

    Court voids indefinite suspension of FADAMA coordinator

    The National Industrial Court has voided the indefinite suspension slammed on the Ebonyi State Coordinator of the World Bank Assisted FADAMA III Project, Cletus Nwakpu, by the state government.

    Nwakpu, an experienced civil servant, had overseen the implementation of the world bank sponsored FADAMA projects in the state.

    But on July 14, 2020 the state government under former governor David Umahi suspended him indefinitely on unproven allegations of funds misappropriation and embezzlement.

    Read Also: Supreme Court gets full complement of 21 justices

    Nwakpu denied the allegations and in January 2022, sued Ebonyi State Government and six others.

    He prayed the court to grant him 14 reliefs, including lifting of the indefinite suspension illegally imposed on him, reinstating him to his job as Fadama coordinator, payment of his salary arrears from July 2020 to July 2023.

    He also prayed for payment to him by the defendants the sum of N500 million being damages in aggravated terms for the flagrant violation of his rights as a senior and confirmed public/civil servant, who was subjected to malicious and unlawful suspension.

    He said the sack and report of same in the media caused him psychological and financial torture, character defamation, loss of employment opportunities, harassment and public embarrassment.

    Ruling on the matter, Justice Oluwakayode Arowosegbe said the state government violated the rights of fair hearing of the claimant.

  • Court freezes accounts over suspicious transactions

    Court freezes accounts over suspicious transactions

    Four commercial banks have been ordered to freeze seven accounts in furtherance of an ongoing police investigation into alleged suspicious transactions.

    Magistrate Abdulsalam Abubakar of the Chief Magistrate Court (Upper), Nasarawa State in New Karu, issued the order on January 19 in four separate ex-parte motions filed in the name of the Inspector General of Police (IGP).

    In one of the banks, the order is directed at an account – said to be owned by Odupaye A. Abimbola and another said to be owned by Toluwani Gideon Olisa.

    In the third bank, the affected accounts and the owners are Toluwani Gideon Olisa.

    Read Also: Supreme Court gets full complement of 21 justices

    The fourth affected bank and owner is Odupaye Abimbola Joseph; and in another – Toluwani Olisa and Olisa Toluwani Gideon.

    The court also ordered the banks to furnish the Commissioner of Police (INTERPOL), Force CID Annex, Lagos, with the certified true copies (CTC) of the following information concerning the accounts: account opening package and mandate files; the BVN linked to the accounts and the statements of account reflecting transfer with account numbers of both inflows and outflows from inception to date.

    The banks are also ordered to provide certificates of identification (pursuant to Section 84(4) of the Evidence Act, 2011).

    They are also to place Post No Debit (PND) including ATM, but allow inflow of cash into the accounts. The court ordered the banks to “effect arrest of the account holders if seen and contact INTERPOL on 08085824015 and any other information that could assist the ongoing investigation.”

  • Court adjourns Eko Atlantic City’s dredging suit

    Court adjourns Eko Atlantic City’s dredging suit

    The Federal High Court in Lagos will on May 8 hear closing arguments in a case challenging the legality of Eko Atlantic City’s dredging.

    The plaintiff, Mondinvest Limited, filed the suit over eight years ago.

    The suit has M. V. Breughel, Master of the M. V. Breughel and Dredging Environmental Marine Engineering N. V. (Belgium), employed by Gilbert and Ronald Chagoury, as the defendants.

    Mondinvest is praying the court to declare the dredging and land reclamation in the Kuramo Waters of Victoria Island as illegal.

    The area has been designated by the Chagoury brothers as the Eko Atlantic Phases II-VI.

    The plaintiff, in addition to seeking damages for alleged negligent dredging and devaluation of property, is also asking for a restoration of the Kuramo Waters to its original condition under the court’s supervision.

    According to the plaintiff, the environmental part of the claim is based on the paramount importance of the Kuramo Waters as a natural overflow and drain to the Atlantic Ocean of Five Cowrie Creek and Victoria Island during the rainy season and when severe flooding occurs.

    The ongoing dredging operations, Mondinvest claimed, are aimed at sealing up the Kuramo Waters in a bid to create more land for the Eko Atlantic project.

    The plaintiff’s claim is that the consequences of the phases of land reclamation would eradicate the efficacy of the Kuramo Waters without which Victoria Island would become prone to heavy floods and gradually go underwater.

    Read Also: 65 CSOs pull out from planned Labour’s nationwide protest

    Expert evidence from an internationally renowned oceanographer in Washington DC in the United States of America (U.S.A) had been adduced to in the suit to the effect that the Kuramo Waters has existed as a natural body of water serving Victoria Island as long as Lagos has existed.

    The plaintiff argued that the consequences of the ongoing dredging, which has been intensified by the Belgian dredger owners since June 2023 to date, is to destroy property values, investments, and livelihoods of citizens along the Kuramo waters shoreline and beyond.

    The claimant is seeking damages for negligent, unlawful and illegal dredging by the defendants.

    At the resumed hearing on February 20, the plaintiff’s counsel, Olumide Aju (SAN), concluded his cross-examination of the defence expert witness, Prof. Lucian Chukwu.

    Justice Daniel Osiagor adjourned till May 8 for the closing arguments.

    The case was previously before Justice Jude Dagat, who, in a judgment in March 2016, refused an application by the dredger owners to dismiss the suit.

    He held that Mondinvest Limited had a good cause of action against the dredger owners.

  • Court: pay octogenarian N98.2m, $325,000

    Court: pay octogenarian N98.2m, $325,000

    Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered three Indians to pay N98.2 million and $325,000 to 87-year-old businessman, Isaac Oluwole Oginni, for breaching his right to a fair hearing and violating Section 262 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA),

    Justice Ayokunle Faji declared Oginni remains a director of his three companies – Bolawole Enterprises Nigeria, Lesag Nigeria and Intermanagement Nigeria.

    The Indians are Jai Bhagwan Gupta and his sons – Vineet and Rachit. The suit is FHC/L/CS/1431/2019.

    The plaintiff, through his lawyer, Yakubu Galadima, sought a declaration he remains a director in the first, second and third defendant companies.

    He said as first subscriber and director in the firms, he is entitled to certain benefits that were denied him.

    Oginni prayed for an order compelling the fourth defendant to render an account of the N7 billion granted to the first defendant by the Export Expansion Grant Scheme.

    But the defendants’ lawyer, Festus Afeiyodion, urged the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s originating summons for lacking in merit.

    Justice Faji held that no reasons were given by the defendants for removal of the plaintiff as a director, contrary to Section 262 of CAMA.

    “Section 262 of the law states that reasons must be given in the notice requesting a director’s removal before a director can be removed,” the judge noted.

    The court restrained the first to sixth defendants either by themselves or their agents from any act that may curtail or impede the rights of the plaintiff as a director.

    On his entitlements, the judge held: “I grant the plaintiff N81,000,000. and $150,000. This covers benefits up to August 17, 2017.

    “The vacation allowance was N1 million per year. The period from 2017 to date is seven years. An additional N7 million is due to the plaintiff as vacation allowance.

    Read Also: 65 CSOs pull out from planned Labour’s nationwide protest

    “Yearly bonus is $25,000 per year. Total of $25,000 for seven years is $175, 000.

    “Directors payment of N1,400,000 for seven years is N9,800,000.

    “Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to N98,200,000 and $325,000.”

    Justice Faji refused plaintiff’s request for N500 million, being his benefits, commissions and brokerages.

    Galadima hailed the judgment, saying: “The Judgment is sound and unassailable.

    “Our client set up an indigenous company, called Bolawole Enterprises Nigeria in 1980s and brought a friend of his, the fourth respondent to manage the company.

    “The fourth respondent brought his children into the company as directors, altered the initial shares and ultimately tried to remove our client and his late wife as directors. That was when we approached the court…”

    “It is a big lesson for the indigenous companies to thread with caution when dealing with foreign partners so as not to lose their companies.”

  • Alleged N10b fraud: Court declines to transfer Kogi Chief of Staff’s Abuja trial

    Alleged N10b fraud: Court declines to transfer Kogi Chief of Staff’s Abuja trial

    • Orders accelerated hearing

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has declined the request for either the discontinuation or transfer to Kogi State the on-going money laundering trial of the state’s Chief of Staff, Ali Bello, and an associate, Dauda Suleiman.

    They are being tried by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for allegedly laundry about N10billion belonging to Kogi State during the tenure of the immediate past Governor, Yahaya Bello.

    Lawyer to Suleiman, Nureini Jimoh (SAN) had, in his two notices of objection, queried the territorial jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in Abuja to try a case relating to the finances of Kogi State.

    Jimoh also queried the power of the EFCC, being a federal agency, to prosecute offences relating to the use of Kogi State’s funds even after the state’s House of Assembly had investigated and come out with resolutions that no money was missing.

    He equally queried the competence of the amended charge filed against his client.

    In a ruling on Friday, Justice James Omotosho faulted all the issues raised in the two notices of objection and held that the Abuja court possesses the territorial jurisdiction to hear the case even on grounds of insecurity.

    Relying on the provision of Section 93 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (2015), Justice Omotosho held that even though the proper venue of a criminal trial is a court within that locality, in this case, Kogi State insecurity is ground to file and try such offences outside Kogi State.

    Justice Omotosho said: “The main plank of this objection goes to the root of ownership of the funds in question. 

    “Counsel to the 2nd defendant has relied on several cases where the Court held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission lacks the powers to investigate financial crimes against a State. 

    “However, the decisions in those cases are distinguishable from this instant case. 

    “In those cases, the Prosecution had led evidence and closed its case before the objections were made and ruled upon. 

    “In this case, the prosecution has not closed its case and this court cannot on the basis of the evidence led so far conclude that the monies indeed belong to Kogi State. 

    “In addition, the second defendant is expected to lead evidence to show that indeed the Kogi State House of Assembly investigated and found that no monies are missing and the facts are in respect of which the EFCC has no power to investigate and prosecute. 

    “It is therefore premature at this stage to hold that the complainant lacks powers to investigate the said offences. 

    “It is also worthy of note that the offences charged prima facie borders on the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act which the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission is empowered to investigate and prosecute. Section 7 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act,” the judge said.

    In relation to the defendant’s objection to the amendment of the charge, the judge said the amended charge filed on 5th February 2024 has only been filed and it is left for the court to deem it amended and call on the defendants to enter their plea to the newly amended charge. 

    “The mere fact that this amended charge is titled amended charge, where there exists a pending amended charge, is merely semantics. 

    Read Also: Alleged N10b fraud: Court declines request to transfer Kogi Chief of Staff’s Abuja trial

    “The prosecution is entitled to amend its charge or even frame a new charge and the only requirement is for the defendant to be allowed to take his plea on the new charge. 

    “Thus the submission that the charge is different is simply as to form and not to substance. Both charges bother on money laundering offences and not offences that are of completely different nature like substituting a charge of murder for a charge of money laundering.

    “Consequently, I hold that the amended charge filed on 5th February 2024 is hereby deemed valid and competent. 

    “Under my inherent powers under Section 6 (6) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, I order that the amended charge filed on 5th February 2024 be christened second amended charge.

    “The defendants are therefore called upon to enter their plea to the second amended charge. 

    “In final analysis, the objections of the second defendant are bound to fail. Consequently, the objections of the second defendant are hereby overruled.

    “In the interest of justice, I hereby grant accelerated hearing of the charge or matter and it is also hereby ordered that any objections by any of the parties relating to the charge or amended charge shall be put in abeyance till the final address stage when same will be carefully considered and determined,” Justice Omotosho said.

  • Alleged N10b fraud: Court declines request to transfer Kogi Chief of Staff’s Abuja trial

    Alleged N10b fraud: Court declines request to transfer Kogi Chief of Staff’s Abuja trial

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has declined the request for either the  discontinuation or transfer to Kogi State of the ongoing money laundering trial of the State’s Chief of Staff, Ali Bello and an associate, Dauda Suleiman.

    They are being tried by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for allegedly laundry about N10billion belonging to Kogi State during the tenure of the immediate past Governor, Yahaya Bello.

    Lawyer to Suleiman, Nureini Jimoh (SAN) had, in his two notices of objection, queried the territorial jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in Abuja to try a case relating to the finances of Kogi State.

    Jimoh also queried the power of the EFCC, being a federal agency, to prosecute offences relating to the use of Kogi State’s funds even after the state’s House of Assembly has investigated and came out with resolutions that no money was missing.

    He equally queried the competence of the amended charge filed against his client.

    In a ruling in Friday, Justice James Omotosho faulted all the issues raised in the two notices of objection and held that the Abuja court possesses the territorial jurisdiction to hear the case even on grounds of insecurity.

    Relying on the provision of Section 93 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (2015) Justice Omotosho held that even though the proper venue of a criminal trial is a court within  that locality, in this case, Kogi State insecurity is a ground to file and try such offences outside Kogi State.

    Justice Omotosho said: “The main plank of this objection goes to the root of ownership of the funds in question. 

    “Counsel to the 2nd Defendant has relied on several cases where the Court held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission lacks the powers to investigate financial crimes against a State. 

    “However, the decisions in those case are distinguishable from this instant case. 

    “In those cases, the Prosecution had led evidence and closed its case before the objections were made and ruled upon. 

    “In this case, the prosecution has not closed its case and this court cannot on the basis of the evidence led so far conclude that the monies indeed belong to Kogi State. 

    Read Also: Kogi governorship poll: Court strikes out APP’s petition

    “In addition, the second defendant is expected to lead evidence to show that indeed the Kogi State House of Assembly investigated and found that no monies are missing and the facts are in respect of which the EFCC has no power to investigate and prosecute. 

    “It is therefore premature at this stage to hold that the complainant lacks powers to investigate the said offences. 

    “It is also worthy of note that the offences charged prima facie borders on the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act which the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission is empowered to investigate and prosecute. Section 7 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act,” the judge said.

    In relation to the defendant’s objection to the amendment of the charge the judge said the  amended charge filed on 5th February 2024 has only been filed and it is left for the court to deem it amended and call on the defendants to enter their plea to the newly amended charge. 

    “The mere fact that this amended charge is titled amended charge ,where there exist a pending amended charge, is merely semantics. 

    “The prosecution is entitled to amend its charge or even frame a new charge and the only requirement is for the defendant to be allowed to take his plea on the new charge. 

    “Thus the submission that the charge is different is simply as to form and not to substance. Both charges bother on money laundering offences and not offences that are of completely different nature like substituting a charge of murder for a charge of money laundering.

    “Consequently, I hold that the amended charge filed on 5th February 2024 is hereby deemed valid and competent. 

    “Under my inherent powers under Section 6 (6) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, I order that the amended charge filed on 5th February 2024 be christened second amended charge. 

    “The defendants are therefore called upon to enter their plea to the second amended charge. 

    “In final analysis, the objections of second defendant is bound to fail. Consequently, the objections of second defendant are hereby overruled. 

    “In the interest of justice, I hereby grant accelerated hearing of the charge or matter and it is also hereby ordered that any objections by any of the parties relating to the charge or amended charge shall be put in abeyance till final address stage when same will be carefully considered and determined,” Justice Omotosho said.