The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)

  • Belgore’s N500m fraud charge: Join me as defendant, Diezani tells court

    A former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Allison-Madueke on Monday asked a Federal High Court in Lagos to issue an order, listing her as a party to a N500 million fraud charge involving a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Dele Belgore.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ) had charged Belgore together with a former Minister of National Planning, Prof. Abubakar Suleiman, on a five-count charge bordering on N500 million fraud.

    The EFCC had named the former petroleum minister as an accomplice in the criminal trial.

    She was however, described as being “at large”.

    The EFCC prosecutor, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo had opened the case for the prosecution and had already called two witnesses in the ongoing trial.

    Meanwhile, at the last adjournment on Oct 6, Allison-Madueke, through her lawyer, urged the court to compel the Attorney-General of the Federation to extradite her to Nigeria from the United Kingdom to defend herself.

    Justice Mohammed Aikawa had adjourned the case to hear the motion to join Allison-Madueke.

    At the resumed trial on Monday, Mr Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), counsel representing Allison-Madueke (the applicant), urged the court to grant his application for “joinder of the applicant” in the sole interest of justice.

    “My lord, we have a motion dated Sept. 29 and an affidavit of 16 paragraphs together with a written address which we rely on.

    “We have received the counter-affidavit of counsel, but there remains yet one consideration which should touch conscience of parties.

    “In four counts of the charge, the applicant’s name was mentioned clearly and there is no alteration to the fact that she has been charged; it simply suggests that it is a consummated complaint.”

    According to Ikpeazu, by the definition Section of 494 (1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, a defendant is any person against whom a complaint or charge is made, while a charge refers to an allegation that any named person has committed an offence.

    He argued that from count one to count four, the name of the applicant was mentioned as an accomplice, adding that it would be in the interest of justice to join her in the charge.

    Persuasively citing the authority of Frn vs Jide Omokore, FHC/Abj/CR/121/2016, which he argues bears similarity with the instant case, he noted that the judge had struck out the charges on similar grounds.

    “We will have no objections if the applicant’s name is extracted from the charge, then, trial can proceed. Otherwise, she should be included in the charge.

    “I know that she will be happy to come and face the trial,” he told the court.

    Objecting to the motion for joinder, counsel to the first accused, Mr E. O. Shofunde (SAN), informed the court of his counter-affidavit filed in opposition to the application.

    Firstly, Shofunde, argued that the applicant was not a necessary party to the suit since in the end, the court will only decide the guilt or innocence of the first and second accused who were charged.

    Again, he contended that by the combined provisions of Sections 216(2), 221, 273, 274, and 494(1) of the Criminal Justice Act, only the prosecution could exercise the power to amend a process during trial.

    He argued that it will be “incongruous” for any other party to seek an amendment of a criminal charge, adding that the court will not make an order in vain.

    Besides, the counsel argued that it will amount to a waste of precious judicial time if that amendment was allowed since some progress had been made in the case.

    In his response, Oyedepo, agreed with the first defence counsel and vehemently opposed the application for joinder, citing the Ewenla Vs State case.

    He noted that where trial had commenced, the state could only amend a charge for purposes of adding offences and not defendants.

    Oyedepo said:“Iif an amendment is allowed at this stage, it will occasion a miscarriage of justice.”

    He added that several attempts were initially made to interrogate the applicant, but that she fled to London after she got wind of the move by the EFCC, and has since then, carefully avoided any meeting with the commission.

    According to Oyedepo, it is misconceived and too late in the day for the applicant to now seek to be joined in the charge when she is already under investigation in London.

    He submitted that whenever the applicant returns to Nigeria, she can still be tried as time does not run against the prosecution in criminal trial.

    After listening to the counsel, Justice Aikawa fixed Nov. 1 for ruling.

    In the amended charge, Diezani was alleged to have conspired with Belgore and Sulaiman on or about March 27, 2015 to directly take possession of the sum of N450 million which they reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of unlawful act.

    They were also alleged to have taken the said funds in cash which exceeded the amount authorized by law without going through the financial institutions.

    Belgore and Sulaiman were also alleged to have paid the sum of N50 million to a man, Sheriff Shagaya, without going through any financial institution.

    The offences contravened the provisions of Sections 15(2)(d), 1(a), 16(d) and 18 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Amended Act, 2012.

    NAN

  • FG rejects Diezani’s application for trial in Nigeria

    FG rejects Diezani’s application for trial in Nigeria

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    To him, that would occasion a miscarriage of justice.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Justice Aikawa will decide the application on Wednesday.

     

     

  • Senate invites IG-P over alleged unpaid N6.5bn revenue

    Senate invites IG-P over alleged unpaid N6.5bn revenue

    The Senate Ad-hoc Committee on Alleged Fraudulent Activities in Collection, Accounting, Remittance and Expenditure by Revenue Generating Agencies has invited the Inspector-General of Police (IG-P), Mr Ibrahim Idris, to appear before it.

    The committee’s Chairman, Sen. Solomon Adeola, said in statement signed by his Media Adviser, Mr Kayode Odunaro, on Sunday in Abuja.

    According to him, the invitation followed findings on a N6.5 billion unpaid revenue accruing from the Lagos Trade Fair Complex.

    He said, others invited to appear before the committee are the Director Generals of Directorate of State Security ( DSS ), Bureau of Public Enterprise ( BPE ) and National Council on Privatisation ( NCP ).

    Adeola said the essence of the invitation was to get the Police and DSS to assist the Federal Ministry of Commerce and Industry and the Bureau of Public Enterprise ( BPE )in recovering the money, which had accrued for over nine years.

    He said that the invitation was to also assist in ejecting the concessionaire of the Trade Fair Complex, LITFC, AULIC Nigeria Limited and recovering the complex.

    Adeola said it had become necessary to recover the 322 hectares multi billion Naira complex following a huge debt due in the N40 billion lease fees.

    Adeola quoted the Director-General of BPE, Mr Alex Okoh, as saying the concession agreement to AULIC Nigeria Limited was revoked in early September by the Federal Government.

    He further quoted Okoh as saying all efforts to eject the concessionaire including the use of the Divisional Police at the complex and Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ) proved abortive.

    Adeola said findings showed that “after the initial fees of N200 million paid by the concessionaire in 2007 and another N12 million, it has not paid a dime to the federal government, with outstanding revenue of N6.5 billion.

    “The concessionaire has bastardised the trade fair complex with hospitality and real estate businesses without approved plans.

    “It is shocking that an individual or corporate organisation could operate so lawlessly, withholding federal government revenue, while contravening a government revocation order of his concessionaire agreement.

    “What we need to do at this point is to recover the Trade Fair Complex from the concessionaire and subsequently pursue the issue of N6.5 billion unremitted federal government revenue.

    “Since the local police cannot handle the ejection with the concessionaire still operating and collecting revenue using all manner of tactics including thuggery, we are inviting the IG-P and DG-DSS to address this illegal challenge on the authority.

    “I am surprised that anyone can flagrantly operate as if he is above the law and the government,’’ the statement read in part.

    NAN

  • Maina: NANS wants suspected accomplices suspended

    Maina: NANS wants suspected accomplices suspended

    The National Association of Nigerian Students ( NANS ) has called for immediate suspension of those suspected of complicity in reinstating Mr Abdulrasheed Maina, former Chairman of Pension Task Team, into civil service.

    NANS’s President, Chinonso Obasi, in a statement on Sunday in Abuja, said that suspending suspected accomplices in the case would ensure credible probe of the scandal.

    Maina was in 2012 accused of misappropriating N100 billion pension funds while he headed the Presidential Task Force on Pension Reforms, an assignment given to him by former President Goodluck Jonathan.

    While investigation was being conducted on the allegation, he deserted his job as a Deputy Director in the Ministry of Interior, and disappeared from the country.

    He was declared wanted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ) and the Police, and was dismissed from service.

    But Maina resurfaced in the country few months ago and was reinstated in service and deployed back to Ministry of Interior as acting Director.

    This development drew the flak of President Muhammadu Buhari, who ordered immediate disengagement of the officer from public service, and demanded report on the issue from the Head of Service of the Federation.

    However, Maina is believed to have escaped from the country again.

    Obasi said that revelations emanating from government circles, particularly in respect to breaches of service rules, insubordination, allegations and counter-allegations on act bordering, were embarrassing.

    He said that Buhari was elected to clear Nigeria of corruption and impunity, hence a case of such magnitude should not be trivialised.

    He said, “Just recently, a mind-boggling revelation was made of how Maina was smuggled back to the civil service after almost five years of absconding.

    “The elevation of Maina from Deputy Director to Director with evidence of official exchange of correspondence amongst government officials is nothing but attempt to ridicule the public image and psyche of Nigerians and the civil service system.

    “As advocates of sane and corrupt-free Nigeria, we make bold to ask President Muhammadu Buhari to swiftly suspend all heads of commission, extra-ministerial departments and ministries involved in this sour saga.

    “The Head of Service of the Federation, and the Chairman of Federal Civil Service Commission deserve nothing but immediate suspension from office and probe for allowing themselves to be caught in this web of professional misconduct.’’

    The NANS president said that it had become imperative for Buhari to rid his administration of those who were making mockery of his commitment to fight corruption.

    He said that the police and ant-graft agencies should do all they could to bring Maina to answer to the allegations against him and shed light on how and why he returned to the civil service after absconding for over four years.

    “We insist that same measures taken by the presidency in the cases involving the suspended Secretary to the Government of the Federation and the Director-General of the National Intelligence Agency be meted out to everyone involved in `Mainagate’.

    “This case should be diligently probed and prosecuted and the report should not be swept under the carpet.

    “To this end, we hereby issue a seven-day ultimatum to the Federal Government to act and do so with the highest sense of sincerity regardless of those involved and their closeness to the corridors of power,’’ he said.

    Obasi said that if no action was taken at the expiration of the ultimatum, Nigerian students would be left with no option than to organise a nationwide mass action.

    NAN

  • My request for Jonathan as witness not to humiliate him – Metuh

    My request for Jonathan as witness not to humiliate him – Metuh

    Former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has said his request that ex-President Goodluck Jonathan be compelled to testify as defence witness in his trial was not intended to humiliate Jonathan.

    Metuh said his choice of Jonathan as a witness, was for the ex-President to corroborate his argument that he was innocent of all allegations against him in the charges on which he was being tried.

    He denied allegation by a group – Save Ijaw Nation Group – that the subpoena issued on Jonathan was part of a plot to let him (Metuh) off the hook.

    Metuh, in a statement issued Thursday, said he has no reason to connive with anyone to embarrass Jonathan or seek to be let of the hook, because he was not in any hook, and was innocent of all allegations against him.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Metuh and his company, Destra Investments Limited, before the Federal High Court, Abuja, on a seven-count charge of money laundering involving alleged cash transaction of $2m and fraudulent receipt of N400m meant for procurement of arms from the Office of the NSA.

    The EFCC alleged that Metuh and his firm used the N400m for PDP’s campaign activities during the 2015 presidential election.

    N400m was alleged to be “part of the proceeds of an unlawful activities” of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki.

    But, Metuh has consistently denied knowing that the N400m was paid into his account from the office of the NSA. He has insisted that the N400m‎ was paid to his company’s account by Jonathan for a public relations campaign for his (Jonathan’s) government.

    Metuh, who is currently conducting his defence in the case, applied to the court to issue supoena on Jonathan and Dasuki to compel them to testify as his witnesses in the trial.

    The ex-PDP spokesman said his lawyer had written the duo, who allegedly failed to respond to their letters, a development that informed his decision to apply for the issuance of subpoena on the two.

    Based on Metuh’s request, the trial judge, Justice Okon Abang signed the witness summons issued on Jonathan and Dasuki.

    Both men were absent in court on Wednesday. The court found out that Jonathan has not been served with the subpoena and that although, Dasuki was served, the Department of State Services (DSS) failed to produce him in court.

    While adjourning the case on October 25, Justice Abang gave the court’s bailiff five days to efffect personal service on Jonathan, failing which he should be served through substituted means.

    On Dasuki, the judge ordered the EFCC to explore administrative means, to ensure that DSS produce Dasuki on the next date of October 31.

    In his statement issued yesterday, Metuh said: “My attention has been drawn to a release by the Save Ijaw Nation Group wherein they alleged that the order given by the court in my trial was negotiated by me as a means of letting me ‘off the hook.’

    “They also stated that I surrendered myself to be used to drag down former President Goodluck Jonathan and impugn on his character and person.

    “In the light of this and in deference to the former President, I have elected to make these clarifications personally.

    “First of all, I state unequivocally that I am completely innocent of the charge against me and therefore have no reason to negotiate with anybody to let me off a non-existent hook.

    “It is therefore inconceivable and completely ridiculous for anybody to think that I would for any reason betray or surrender myself to be used against President Goodluck Jonathan, for whom I have immense respect and served diligently, without any apologies, in and out of office.

    “To what end will I conspire with the same set of people, who singled me out to be humiliated and openly handcuffed, while spreading all manner of malicious stories against me, most of which they even denied outright in court while others remain completely unsubstantiated?

    “Ordinarily, the content of the charge against me in the Federal High Court should not breed any worries but for the fact that it now appears that the anti-corruption fight has shifted the burden of proof to a defendant once an allegation is made.

    “On the issue of conniving with the government against former President Goodluck Jonathan, the Save Ijaw Nation Group may be alarmed by successive media reports that he was ordered to be served on Tuesday with an instruction to appear the following day and subsequently given a five-day time limit; setting off a media frenzy as if the former president is needed for reasons more than a mere request by my lawyers for a corroborative evidence in my case.

    “I totally concede that this is not deserving of the status, person and image of the former President especially with his contribution and sacrifices to national development and sustenance of democracy in our dear country.

    “Without prejudice to all the foregoing, I accept that it was the need for corroboration of lack of mens rea on my part that led my lawyers to request for the evidence of the respected former President to assist them in proving my innocence.

    “However, with all the controversies arising from the reports of the said pronouncements and the attendant concerns thereof, I have instructed my legal team to revisit and review the entire issue of the subpoena.

    “In the past 20 months I have shouldered my travails personally and without seeking to involve any other individual and/or groups in this unfortunate saga.

    “I habour no ill feeling or malice towards none as I believe that with time, justice will surely be done in my matter,” Metuh said.

  • How Badeh’s wife, two sons escaped to US – witness

    How Badeh’s wife, two sons escaped to US – witness

    A Federal High Court in Abuja heard Wednesday how the wife of former Chief of Air Staff (COAS), Alex Badeh and his two sons escaped to the United States on learning that they were being investigated in relation to alleged fraud involving Badeh.

    A prosecution witness, Abubakar Madaki, who testified at Wednesday’s proceedings in the Bdeh’s trial gave details of how the allegations against Badeh was investigated.

    Madaki, an investigator with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was led in evidence by lead prosecuting lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) as the prosecution’s 18th witness.

    He gave Badeh’s wife’s name as Mary and his two sons as Alex Badeh (Jr) and Kam.

    He said his team of investigators was able to link some properties allegedly bought by Badeh through proxies to him from the movement of funds from the Nigerian Air Force’s account to the sellers.

    The witness said, “As of today, the subsequent buyers have not registered their interests.

    “Since the subsequent buyers have not registered their interests, as I earlier stated, we got the occupants of the property and those working on the projects, who took us to the final owners of the properties, because the properties have gone to three owners from the original owners.

    “It was the last owners of the properties that we traced the funds from the Nigerian Air Force to, via the agents.”

    He said Badeh’s  wife and two of his children  were being investigated for offences with which the ex-Chief of Air Staff, was charged.

    He said the three of them, however, escaped to the United States of America before investigation was concluded.

    He said all attempts to get them arrested turned out to be futile.

    He said, “At the initial stage, when we started investigation, we invited Alex Badeh (Jnr.) (Badeh’s son) who lives in 19 Kumasi Crescent, Abuja, one of the properties, among the properties earlier mentioned.

    “He happened to be a son of the first defendant (Badeh). He claimed to be a tenant in that property and since investigation was ongoing at the preliminary stage, we allowed him to go to come back when we had enough issues to question him about.

    “He left and never came back. We later got to know that he has left the country for America

    “We were also looking for Mary Iya Badeh, the wife of the first defendant, who is one of the directors in the second defendant (Iyalikam Nigeria Limited).

    “The second defendant (Iyalikam) had received so much funds from the alleged funds we are investigating.

    “She too, according to investigation has left the country for America.

    “Kam Badeh (another of Badeh’s son)  is one of the directors in one of the companies.

    “We have gone round the locations that we had information that he does business, but we are unable to get him.

    “Since the information was that they left through the International Airport, we wrote a letter to the Nigerian Immigration Service and the  Department of Security Service to watch-list them.

    “But We have not been able to get them,” the witness said.

    He said when his team concluded investigation in the case, it “discovered that the first defendant (Badeh) and his wife had earlier incorporated a company Iyalikam Nigeria Limited” in whose accounts they allegedly diverted the Nigerian Air Force’s funds.

    He added “The first defendant was Chief of Air Staff and subsequently the Chief of Defence of Staff. Funds from the Nigerian Air Force  were being diverted to the second defendant (Iyalikam).

    “We also discovered that N558,200,000 was being set aside for the first defendant from the NAF account.

    “Part of the funds were being exchanged into dollars and handed over to the first defendant. Some fractions of the funds were being distributed as directed by the first defendant.

    “The major part of the funds was exchanged into dollars and was used to acquire choice properties in Abuja by the director of finance, Salisu  Yishau.

    “The part of the funds were moved to Right Builders owned by PW4, Mustapha Yerima.”

    The witness als gave details about how a cash sum of $1m was found in Badeh’s residence at 6, Ogun River, Off Danube Crescent.

    “The property was purchased by the defendants with the funds we are investigating.

    “We found in the course of searching the premises $1m which was believed to be part of the alleged funds we are investigating.

    He also said $900,000, allegedly part of the diverted NAF’s funds, was deposited in Badeh’s accounts with the First Bank between 2012 and 2013.

    He said, “A total $900,000 between November  2012 to October or November 2013 was found deposited in the account. The money is believed to be part of funds we are investigating.”

    At a point, the prosecuting lawyer, Jacobs sought the court’s permission to play a video recording of how the EFCC allegedly recovered $1m a property said to be owned  Badeh in Abuja.

    When the court granted his request, Jacobs said he would bring another witness through whom he would play the video recording.

    During cross-examination by Badeh’s lawyer, Lasun Sanusi (SAN), the witness admitted that he (Madaki) did not personally participate in the purchase of the properties under investigation.

    On how funds allegedly diverted from NAF’s account were changed to dollars and eventually ended up in Badeh’s hand, he said the his team got to know about it during investigation.

    Earlier, in a ruling, Justice Okon Abang admitted as exhibits title documents of a N650m Abuja property  sold by Governor Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State to buyers from who Badeh allegedly bought the property, suing a proxy.

    Justice Abang admitted the documents as exhibits after dismissing Badeh’s objection to their admission.

    Badeh and his firm, Iyalikam Nigeria Limited are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 10-count charge of money laundering, in which they were accused of fraudulently removing about N3.97bn from the account of the Nigerian Air Force.

    They are also accused of using the money to buy and develop landed properties in Abuja for Badeh and two sons between January and December 2013.

    The documents admitted by the court’s ruling yesterday include the deeds of assignment between Fayose and Tony O. Ezekiel dated December 12, 2009, and the Certificate of Occupancy bearing the governor’s name.

    Other documents admitted as exhibits included a letter dated March 4, 2016 with attachment sent by the Lands Department of the Federal Capital Territory Administration in response to EFCC’s request; a reply dated May 5, 2016 by the Abuja Geographic Information; letter by the Solicitor-General of the Federation and Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Justice.

    The prosecution’s 4th witness, Mustapha Yerima, who testified on May 23, 2016,  Mustapha told the court  how a plot of land in Abuja worth N650m and which was originally owned by Fayose was purchased by Badeh for the construction of a shopping mall at a cost of N1.2bn.

    Yerima, a contractor and Managing Director of Life Builders Technology Limited, Said the shopping mall is located along Amino Kano Crescent, in Abuja.

    He said Badeh eventually acquired the land from the third buyer.

    Yerima said he reached a bargain with Badeh to build the mall for N1.2bn.

    He said that a former Director of Finance and Account of the Nigerian Air Force, Air Commodore Aliyu Yishau (retd), who had earlier tes‎tified as the first prosecution witness (PW1), was the middle man between him and Badeh.

    The trial resumes on November 1.

  • Metuh’s trial: Court gives five days for service of summons on Jonathan

    Metuh’s trial: Court gives five days for service of summons on Jonathan

    A Federal High Court in Abuja Wednesday gave the bailiff of the court five days within which to effect personal service of subpoena (witness summons) issued on former President Goodluck Jonathan to testify as defence’s witness in the trial of ex-spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Olisa Metuh.

    Justice Okon Abang said this in a ruling on the arguments lawyers to parties on what further steps the court should take in view of the absence of Jonathan and foremr National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki in court yesterday.

    The court had on Tuesday adjourned the criminal trial to yesterday for Jonathan and Dasuki, subpoenaed on the request of Metuh, to appeal and testify as defence’s witnesses.

    At the resumption of proceedings Wednesday, it was discovered that neither Jonathan nor Dasuki was in court.

    While there was evidence that Dasuki had been served with the witness summons, the court noted that its bailiff was not yet able to serve the witness summons issued on Jonathan on him.

    When asked what further steps should be taken, prosecuting lawyer, Sylvester Tahir urged the court to order that substituted service of the summons be effected on Jonathan since an attempt at personal service has failed.

    As it relates, to Dasuki, Tahir asked the court to apply the provision of Section 246(1)(a) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA).

    Tahir said: “There was a report on Monday the Dasuki has been served on October 18. Today is the return date. The witness that has been served is not here.

    “Section 246(1)(a) of ACJA has addressed the situation at hand. It says A witness, who refuses or neglect without reasonable excuse, to attend court in response to a witness summons is liable to a summary conviction and sentencing to fine of N10, 000 or imprisonment of 2months.

    “What we are saying is that there is no reasonable excuse why this witness is not in court having been duly served with the summons

    “Since it is a continuous trial, the court may make further order communicating the next adjourned date to the Director General of Department of State Services (DSS).

    “An order has been made by this honourable court, but is has not been obeyed. The court has the inherent power to direct information on the case to the witness summons through the agency of government who is detaining him.

    “The court should ask that he be produced at the next adjourned date. He should come to court and say why he cannot testify, we should not speculate. An order for his production should be made,” Tahir said.

    When asked by the court, as the lawyer to the complainant what steps he has taken to ensure that an agency of Federal Government (DSS) comply with the order made by Court of Appeal on September 29 this year, Tahir said he had reported to his employer, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Tahir said: “Speaking truthfully, we applied for the judgment of the Court of Appeal. I personally gave it to the Chief Registrar of this court as a way of facilitating the attendance of the witness at these proceedings.

    “I also submitted certified true copies of the judgment and enrolled order to the management of the EFCC and gave them adequate briefing. I cannot be sure what steps the EFCC management has taken, if any, by way of liaising with the DSS,” Tahir said.

    Responding, lawyer for the defence, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN)  objected to the position canvassed by Tahir.

    They urged the court to ensure that more attempt were made to serve Jonathan personally before the option of substituted means could be considered.

    Ruling, Justice Abang agreed with the submissions of the defence lawyers and directed that further attempt should be made at serving Jonathan personally, failing which the option of substituted means could be explored.

    On Dasuli, he directed that the issue should be handled administratively since the case was being prosecuted by an agency of the Federal Government (the EFCC) and Dasuki was being held by another agency of the Federal Government (DSS).

    He said the court would be unable to make meaningful progress where Dasuki and Jonathan fail to attend court as directed.

    The judge said: “Col. Dasuki (retd), His Excellency, Goodluck Jonathan are not in court Wednesday to give evidence in this matter.

    “As regards Col. Dasuki (retd), there is proof of service. The order of the Court of Appeal in appeal number CA/A/159C/17, has been complied with by serving the subpoena on the Department of State Services to produce Col. Dasuki today. No reason has been offered and he is not produced in court today.

    “As regards the production of Col. Dasuki in court today, at the subsequent hearing of this matter, this will be addressed administratively.

    “From the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated September 29, 2017, it is stated that Col. Dasuki is in the custody of the Department of State Service, which is an organ or an integral part of the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    “Learned counsel, representing the Federal Government of Nigeria in this matter must persuade his client, that is, the Federal Government of Nigeria, to produce Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd) in court at the next adjourned date, failing which it will be extremely difficult for the court to make progress in this matter.

    “As regards His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, who is not in court today, it is on record that he is yet to be served the witness summon.

    “The court cannot apportion blame to him for his failure to be in court today.

    “It is my humble view that service of court process on the witness or a party goes to the root of adjudication, absence of which will nullify proceedings, no matter how well conducted.

    “It is not sufficient that the bailiff of the court made only one attempt to serve him with the witness summon.

    “On this, I agree entirely with the learned counsel for the 1st defendant (Metuh), Dr. O. Ikpeazu (SAN), that it cannot be an exercise of due diligence on the part of the bailiff to have His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan served with the witness summon on only one attempt.

    “The bailiff is hereby directed to make further attempts in effecting personal service of the witness summon on His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    “Although the law does not state the number of attempts to be made in effecting personal service, one attempt, in my view, is not sufficient.

    “The bailiff of the court is hereby given five days from today to effect personal service of the subpoena on His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    “Thereafter, the law will take it course. However, if personal service cannot be effected, it can be served by substituted means.

    “For this purpose, the bailiff, under Section 124 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), is an agent of the first defendant, Olisa Metuh, for the purpose of service of process on His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    “The bailiff is the agent of the first defendant for the purpose of substituted service. This is because the first defendant elected to call him (Jonathan), not the court.

    “If personal service cannot be effected, it is only reasonable that the first defendant has a duty to apply for leave to serve His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan by substituted means. I so hold.”

    The judge then scheduled both Jonathan and Dasuki to appear in court on October 31.

    He said: “In the light of the above, the matter will be adjourned, again, at the instance of the first defendant, to enable the subpoenaed witnesses to be in court.

    “This matter is therefore adjourned until October 31 to enable the subpoenaed witness – Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd.) and His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan to give evidence at the instance of the first defendant.”

    In an earlier ruling, Justice Abang struck out the motion filed by Dasuki, seeking the setting aside of the subpoena issued on him.

    Dasuki had argued that he was not in the right frame of mind to testify in the case because he has been held in custody since December 2015 and could no longer remember all that happened while he was in office.

    He also argued that there was no way he could testify in Metuh’s trial without implicating himself, because issues in the Metuh case were related to those for which he (Dasuki) had been charged in three pending cases.

    In his ruling, the judge said: “The court as presently constituted only performed its statutory duty as provided under section 287(2) of the 1999 Constitution.

    “The court has no jurisdiction to make an order that seeks to set aside the subpoena or in any way to suspend the execution of the subpoena not being the court that made the order in the first place.

    “From the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant, it seems to me that the applicant is dissatisfied with the order of the Court of Appeal compelling him to appear before this court to give evidence at the instance of the first defendant.

    “If that is the position, the applicant, Col. Dasuki (retd.), is expected to know what to do and where to go, definitely not to come to this court to file this kind of application.

    “This application has the tendency of asking this court to review the judgment of the Court of Appeal. This is legally impossibility.

    “Doing so will amount to judicial anarchy. The subpoena was issued pursuant to the judgment of the Court of Appeal under section 287(2) of the Constitution.

    “A judicial action of the Court of Appeal cannot be subject to review by the Federal High Court,” Justice Abang said.

    He noted that Dasuki, not being a party to the Metuh trial, he ought to have sought and obtained the leave of court before filing the application.

    Justice Abang said: “The court only exercised its statutory powers under Section 287(2) of the Constitution and also in compliance with the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on September 29.

    “I have no jurisdiction to hear this application on merit. There is no live issue capable of being resolved on the merits.

    “The application is incompetent and same is accordingly struck out,” Justice Abang said.

    The EFCC is prosecuting Metuh and his company, Destra Investments Limited, on seven counts of money laundering involving alleged cash transaction of $2m and fraudulent receipt of N400m meant for procurement of arms from the Office of the NSA.

    The prosecution alleged in the charges that Metuh and his firm used the N400m for PDP’s campaign activities during the 2015 presidential election.

    The sum of N400m was alleged to be “part of the proceeds of unlawful activities” of the immediate past NSA, Dasuki.

    Read: Metuh to call Jonathan as witness in N400m, $2m alleged fraud trial

  • Maina family rises in defence of son

    Maina family rises in defence of son

    Barely 24 hours after his properties were sealed by the operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in Kaduna, family members of the embattled former chairman of Presidential Task Force on Pension Reforms, Abdulrasheed Maina have cried out that their son is being persecuted by corrupt elements in President Muhammadu Buhari’s government.

    They said, the ongoing ‘persecutions’ of Abdulrasheed Maina, was the handiwork of a cabal in government, which is witch-hunting him because he did not allow them steal pension fund.

    The Maina family however threatened that, Abdulrasheed will soon open the can of worm, as regard facts in his possession which they said are capable of nailing the cabals in his pursuit.

    The Abdullahi Maina family said that their son is not a fraudster but someone who worked diligently to save pensioners from thieves, adding that his recent sack by President Muhammadu Buhari was because Mr President was misinformed. The family lamented that the ongoing persecution by a government that preaches the rule of law is bad, but noted that Abdulrasheed is in possession of documents and facts that would vindicate him and show the true intention of his persecutors.

    Addressing the media Wednesday in Kaduna, spokesman of the Maina family, Malam Aliyu Maina, who was flanked by Salihu Maina and Ladan Abdullahi, said that the marking of the houses they inherited from their father in Kaduna by the Economics and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is wrong, but they are ready to take legal recourse to protect their fundamental rights.

    They said that Abdulrasheed left Nigeria following threats to his life, only for President Muhammadu Buhari to invite him to come and help his administration. “You must have noticed the recent attempt by some cabal to ridicule and tarnish the image of the Maina family in the media. Were our brother, Abdulrasheed Maina has been blackmailed as a fraudster.

    “The cabals have gone to the extent of marking our house in red paints with an inscription of E.F.C.C under investigation. The EFCC is wrong in their action because Abdulrasheed inherited so many properties from his late father in Kaduna and Abuja, some of them were built before he was born so how could he have acquired them fraudulently.

    “The entire family of Abdullahi Maina is categorically stating that our son is not in any way a fraudster, rather he is a messiah who brought reforms into Nigerian Pension Scheme, whose effort saw the disappearance of pensioners roaming the streets of Abuja and other state capital in Nigeria.

    “It is on record that Abdulrasheed Maina’s reform put to a stop the fraudulent withdrawals of huge sums from both the Nigerian Pension Board, the Nigerian Police Pension Board etc. Perhaps it is this noble effort that made him enviable to the present administration when they came into power to convince him to come back and assist in its “Change” agenda.”

    According to the family, the recent actions may have been targeted at not Maina but high above, “we are aware that all this act of calumny is not targeted against Abdulrasheed Maina alone but against the President of Federal Republic of Nigeria and the office of the Attorney General. We have contacted our lawyers Messr Mamma Nasir & Co and instructed them to act appropriately.

    “We equally know that Abdulrasheed Maina is in possession of many facts that is against the cabal and interesting to the Nigerian populace, which he will disclose very soon,” the family noted.

     

  • More troubles for Maina, as EFCC seals his properties in Kaduna

    More troubles for Maina, as EFCC seals his properties in Kaduna

    The embattled former chairman of the Presidential Pension Reform Task team, Abdulrasheed Maina appeared to be in more troubles, as armed operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) have sealed five Kaduna houses allegedly belonging to him.

    The properties that were sealed include a two storey shopping plaza located at number 2C Ibrahim Taiwo road, a one storey duplex at Katuru road and another property at Kasi new extension.

    The Nation learnt that, the operations which began Monday continued Tuesday and it is expected that more properties belonging to the embattled Maina may be discovered.

    An official of the commission told newsmen that more properties belonging to Maina are still being identified and may be sealed.

    One of the buildings was marked “EFCC Keep Off’, Subject of Investigation’.

    An official of the commission in Kaduna, Ibrahim Kamal confirmed that, so far, the commission had identified six properties belonging to Maina including two companies which were sealed.

    He said one of the houses is on Ibrahim Taiwo road, another on Katuru off Warrior road while four are located on Kano road by Kano extension.

  • Alleged bribery: EFCC closes case against Rickey Tarfa

    Alleged bribery: EFCC closes case against Rickey Tarfa

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has closed its case against a for alleged bribery and unlawful obstruction of public officers.

    Prosecution counsel Mr Rotimi Oyedepo on Monday told Justice Adedayo Akintoye of the Lagos State High Court, Igbosere that the anti-graft agency had exhausted its six witnesses.

    The trial began in March 2016.

    Responding, Tarfa’s counsel, Mr. Jelili Owonikoko (SAN), sought an adjournment so the defence can analyse its case before taking its next step.

    Consequently, Justice Akintoye adjourned till November 16, to hear from the defence.

    The EFCC arraigned Tarfa on March 10, 2016 on a 27-count charge which was subsequently amended to 26 counts.

    He was accused of alleged willful obstruction of authorised EFCC officials, refusal to declare assets and giving false information to a public officer.

    The agency also alleged, among others, that the lawyer offered N5.3million gratification to Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court, Lagos in order to compromise the judge.

    It claimed that Tarfa transferred the money in several tranches to Justice Nganjiwa between June 27, 2012 and December 23, 2014.

    In another instance, the agency alleged that the SAN lied about his age and failed to declare his assets to the commission after his arrest on February 5, 2015.

    Tarfa pleaded not guilty.

    The lawyer is also standing trial before Justice Aishat Opesanwo of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, on a two-count charge of obstruction of justice and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

    He pleaded not guilty to both counts.

    Read Also: EFCC re-arraigns firm’s MD for alleged N160m fraud