The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC) has accused counsel to the accused persons standing trial in the N8 billion currency fraud of attempting to block witnesses and scuttle trial.
The counsel to the EFCC , Mr Rotimi Jacobs and counsel to 2nd and 3rd accused persons, Mr Olalekan Ojo, engaged themselves in a heated argument over the delay in filing applications and reply to such applications , contrary to the order of the court.
At the heat of the argument between the duo , the defence counsel stood up and called on the judge to order Jacobs to withdraw a supposed offensive language against him.
The EFCC alleged that the counsel to the accused “have a game plan by use of their antics to scuttle the trial” .
He argued that the defence counsel had a game plan to ensure that applications were not heard in a bid to ensure that the trial is scuttled.
Ojo told the court that the EFCC could not lay blame on anybody since the papers were served on him in the court on Monday and” we were able to file our response the following morning in less than 24 hours” .
The suspects in the first case heard yesterday are Kolawole Babalola, Olaniran Muniru, Toogun Phillips, Salami Ibrahim and Odia Emmanuel.
The presiding Judge, Justice Ayo Emmanuel, had adjourned to yesterday to enable the parties complete all the necessary service .
However, contrary to the order of the court, some of the defence counsel either failed to file applications as at when due or reply to the applications served on them .
On the second case involving Patience Okoro Eye, Joshua Afolabi, Sunday Ilori, Muniru Olaniran, Kolawole Babalola, and Fatai Yusuf, counsel to the 1st accused person (Patience Okoro Eye) ,Mr Awa Kalu (SAN) sought for a separate trial for his client, in a fresh application before the court.
Kalu drew the attention of the court to the fact that the Ist accused person is the only woman among the suspects and that she would want the court to allow her to be separated from the trial .
He said: “ It is her right to decide separately. There is no fast rule on this. An accused person can decide to be tried separately to examine the evidence against her without inter-posing it with evidence concerning another.”
In his short ruling, Justice Emmanuel said: ” The situation in which we found ourselves this morning is very unfortunate and not in the interest of the accused persons.
“For the 1st and 3rd accused persons requesting for separate trial , the court cannot grant their prayers until it disposes off all the processes before him.”
Jacobs said: “Well, in the proceeding where the defence counsel who were refused bail had their own game plan to ensure that applications were not heard and the trial is scuttled . That is the game plan and they have successfully done that . The judge directed us yesterday that everyone should file their processes yesterday, and we file our own but alas our colleagues did not file contrary to our agreement and the order of the court. So, who is to blame?
“The trial is being scuttled as I said, because we were supposed to be calling our witnesses more than two, three weeks ago . We came here with our witnesses and they brought series of applications to ensure that the trial did not commence . Our witnesses are ready to come and give evidence but they are trying to block those witnesses. So, we are waiting till October now.”
The EFCC counsel absolved himself of any blame, adding that: “The only application I received on Thursday was the 37c and that Thursday, when they served us at the close of business , we went back to Lagos and came on Monday to serve them because we knew clearly that the matter was coming up this morning but… Well, its part of the game plan to respond this morning.
“ On the 1st accused person , we prepared our own and we went to him to serve him and let us exchange papers. But he refused to collect our own yesterday because they did not want the matter to go on. And the strategy is that don’t let this matter go on before these judges and the strategy is that they will wait for the Appeal Court to decide those appeal .
“There is no amount of reforms that can sanitise if we still retain the old habit . So, the old habit is still there to have my way the moment they see the proof of evidence , see what is against their clients, no this matter must not go on. And until we change our habit all these things will still be there”.
Ojo disagreed with the EFCC on the allegation levelled against him.
He said: “ It is the most unwarranted and unnecessary accusation. There is no diligent defence attorney that will fail to raise the kind of objection we have raised , except a defence attorney that is indifferent to the success of his client . We will maintain it and we will defend it that the pronouncement went beyond a necessary and tolerable response in a bail application . Well, in the eyes of the prosecution, that may be.
“You know, we are coming from different background, his own is to secure conviction acting within the confines of the law and the law allows us. Even the market woman is aware of the concept of fair trial, if an accused person is saying I will not get fair trial and he has raised that issue in a court of law, I leave it to the judgement of the entire nation whether that will amount to scuttling the trial, particularly when the basis could be found in black and white. Our application for disqualification is not based on frivolous ground.
“The judge will decide that we have done our best. And it is for us to do everything legitimately possible to secure fair trial for our client. If doing that is scuttling trial , so be it. It is to ensuring the integrity and purity of the stream of the administration of justice in Nigeria.”
