The Nation Newspaper

Tag: False asset declaration

  • Onnoghen: Analysts say charge will change attitude, perception to rule of law

    Key analysts have said that the plan to arraign Chief Judge of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, over alleged failure of assets declaration will change citizens perceptions and orientation about laws.

    A legal practitioner, Mr. Alieze Ekpa, said that people believed that positions, class and level of an individual would bring less effect of the law against them.

    Ekpa disclosed this to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Sunday in Abakaliki while reacting to the plan to arraign the CJN before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    The charges against Onnoghen also include operating bank domiciliary foreign currency accounts in some commercial banks.

    “No one is above the law. If he has gone contrary, the law should take it against him.

    “Lawlessness in the country is becoming too much,” Ekpa said.

    Another legal practitioner, Mr James Ude, said that effectiveness of regular court system was paramount and respect for the rule of law must be bedrock to change people’s orientation about the law.

    “If he has gone contrary, action should be taken to serve as deterrent to those who feel they are above the law.

    “We need to change our orientation and beliefs that president is doing this because of tribe,” Ude said.

    A political analyst, Mr Ikechukwu Nwonu stated that same charge should be accorded to those defaulting.

    “People need to change the ways they talk, behave, like and the earlier we do so the better to move Nigeria forward,” Nwonu said.

    NAN reports that the CJN will appear before the Justice Danladi Yakubu led- Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) in Abuja on six charges bordering on failure to declare his assets as required by law and for operating Bank Domiciliary Foreign Currency Accounts.

    The nation’s Head of the Judiciary is also accused of refusal to declare his assets in breach of the provision of the Code of Conduct Bureau Act.

    He is also being accused of maintaining domiciliary foreign currencies account which comprised dollars, pound sterling and Euro accounts which were alleged to be contrary to relevant laws, especially for public office holders. (NAN)

  • Saraki’s false assets declaration trial resumes in Abuja

    Saraki’s false assets declaration trial resumes in Abuja

    The Senate President, Bukola Saraki, has arrived the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) in Abuja for resumption of his trial for false assets declaration.

    The Court of Appeal had in December last year restored three out of the 18 –count charge dismissed by the CCT and ordered the Senate president to present himself for trial on the charges.

    The tribunal in response to the court’s verdict issued a hearing notice to various parties in the case and picked Tuesday for commencement of sitting on the matter

    Saraki arrived the court at 10: 08 a.m. on Tuesday and was accompanied by some senators.

    His lawyers and several supporters were already seated when he entered the courtroom.

  • Orubebe appeals conviction by CCT

    Orubebe appeals conviction by CCT

    …Says judgment travesty of justice

    Former Niger-Delta Minister, Godsday 0rubebe has appealed his conviction by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) on a charge of false asset declaration.

    In a notice of appeal filed in Abuja Wednesday by his lawyer, Selekeowei Larry (SAN), Orubebe urged the Court of Appeal to set aside the October 4, 2016 judgement of the CCT.

    He raised three grounds of appeal, arguing among others, that the tribunal misdirected itself in reaching its decision that was not supported by evidence led by the prosecution.

    Orubebe argued that the tribunal erred in law when it held that the prosecution proved its case and ordered the forfeiture of the property in issue, Plot 2057 Asokoro District, to the Federal Government, “without any proof of the offence, thereby occasioning gross miscarriage of justice.”

    He argued that Plot 2057 was not acquired corruptly nor even purchased by him, but was a gift to him by the Federal Government. “It is a piece of empty land in the bush.

    Orubebe said he led credible evidence, which the prosecution did not fault, about how he sold the house to a company called Divention Properties Limited, with the company’s Managing Director, Akinwumi Ajibola testifying to that effect during trial.

    He faulted the CCT for holding that he remained the owner of the plot of land on the grounds that Divention, to who the property was sold, did not effect change of ownership.

    “Not only were the deed of assignment, deed of sale and power of Attorney tendered and admitted in evidence, defence witnesses one and two (Ajibola and Orubebe) testified to the transaction without any contradiction. There is no time limit for regularisation of title at the Land Registry,” he said.

    Orubebe further argued against the decision of the CCT, to the effect that it erred in law when, rather than keeping itself within the evidence before it and the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal (CCB/T) Act, it went and relied on the Land Instrument Registration Act (LIRA), without hearing from counsel on both sides.

    “The tribunal has no power beyond the provisions of the CCB/T Act as incorporated under the 5th Schedule of the Constitution.

    “The tribunal lacks the jurisdiction to interpret and sanction under the LIRA, 2007, which neither provides a time limit for the registration of title, nor any sanction for delayed registration,” he said.

    Orubebe further argued, through his lawyer, that “the judgment did not in any way contemplate our law. Our law does not ascribe ownership of a plot of land to a person, who had divested his/her interest by selling to another person.

    “In fact it was made very clear to the tribunal that the transaction was completed well before his last declaration of assets alleged to be in breach of the CCB/T Act.

    “Assuming, without conceding) that Orubebe did not declare the said Plot 2057 Asokoro, it would still not amount to an infraction of the Act, because it (the plot) was a gift to him by the Federal Government.

    “For a non-declaration to amount to an infraction of the Act, the property in question must have been acquired with some income reasonably attributable to corruption. In one sentence, the judgment by the CCT is a travesty of justice,” he said.

  • CCT convicts Orubebe for false asset declaration

    CCT convicts Orubebe for false asset declaration

    Former Niger Delta Minister Godsday Orubebe has been convicted by Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) for violating the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act (CCBTA).

    The tribunal, in a judgment delivered by its Chairman, Justice Danladi Umar, found Orubebe guilty of falsely declaring his assets in 2007.

    The tribunal said the prosecution successfully proved its case that the former minister  deliberately refused to declare his ownership of of Plot 2057 Asokoro District, Abuja.

    It faulted Orubebe’s defence that he had sold the plot of land to former landlord and Managing Director of Givention Properties Limited, Akinwumi Ajibola in 2011 at N10 million and deployed the proceed to paying his rent.

    The tribunal said that after  analysed all the testimonies given by Orubebe, it was difficult to understand why the property he claimed to have sold about six years ago still remained registered in his name at the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Land Administration.

    Umar said in his ruling: “To the tribunal, this is very absurd and not credible. The tribunal observed that under the Lands Instrument Registration Law, the DW1 (Ajibola) was under obligation to register/document his right over Plot 2057.

    “The consequences of non-compliance with statutory requirement, where a statute clearly provides for a particular act to be performed, the failure to perform the act, on the part of the party, will not only be interpreted as a delinquent conduct, but will be interpreted as not complying with the statutory provision.

    “In such a situation, even where the statute did not specifically provide for a sanction, the court can, by the invocation of its imperative jurisdiction, come to the conclusion that the failure to comply with the statutory provision is against the party in default.

    “In the circumstances therefore, there is nothing to show that the accused had divested his right over Plot 2057 Asokoro to DW1 and his company, Divention Properties Ltd.

    “The deed of assignment and the power of Attorney executed by the accused to DW1 on the 13th of June 2011 and no steps taken since then to register the title with the Land Administration Department in the name of DW1, renders the documents as worthless as a tissue of paper under the Land Instrument Registration Law.

    “The tribunal is satisfied with the prosecution that, up till now, it is the name of the accused person that is in the FCT Land Registry as the owner of the property, not DW1/Divention Properties Ltd.

    “The tribunal hereby adjudge the accused guilty as charged, and on that premise, hands down the following punishment: In accordance with Section 23 of the CCB/T Act, as incorporated under the Fifth Schedule to the 1999  Constitution (as amended), the property known as Plot 2057, which belong to the defendant, is hereby seized and forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

    Orubebe was  initially arraigned on on November 9, 2015 on a four-count charge, in which he was accused of failing to declare the Asokoro land and accepting bribe.

    After some delay, the prosecution, led by then Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation (DPPF), Muhammad Diri, amended the charge, reducing the counts to one, excluding the aspect that relates to bribery.

    The single count  read: “That you, Godsday Peter Orubebe, on or about June 29, 2011, while being a minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in charge of the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this honourable tribunal, did make a false declaration of assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau when you failed to declare Plot 2057, Asokoro District, Abuja on assumption of office on September 26, 2007 and on leaving office (at the end of your tenure) on June 29, 2011 and you hereby commit an offence contrary to section 15 of Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap 15 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and punishable under section 23(2) of the same Act.”

    Orubebe was re-arraigned on the amended charge (marked: CCT/ABJ/02/2015) on March 8, 20176.

    The prosecution opened trial on April 7 by calling its sole witness, Samuel Madojemu, an official of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and closed its case on April 24.

    Orubebe conducted his defence on June 2, by calling two witnesses including himself. The other defence witness was Ajibola, who described himself as a lawyer and Managing Director of Givention Properties Limited.

  • Saraki lied in his 2003 asset declaration – witness

    Saraki lied in his 2003 asset declaration – witness

    The trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki for false asset declaration continued Wednesday with the prosecution witness insisting that the defendant lied in the asset declaration form he submitted to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) in 2003.

    The witness, Michael Wetkas, who had been subjected to over seven days of intense drilling in cross-examination by the defence team, insisted Wednesday that Saraki made anticipatory asset declaration in 2003 in respect of some landed property he acquired in 2006 in Ikoyi, Lagos.

    Wetkas, a detective with the Economic and Financial Commission (EFCC) had been differently subjected to cross examination by many senior lawyers recruited by Saraki, inluding former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Kanu Agabi (SAN), Paul Usoro (SAN) an Paul Erokoro (SAN), but he has been consistent that investigation revealed that Saraki made false asset declaration.

    Wednesday, while again, being cross-examined by Usoro, Wetkas said his investigation team relied on information provided by the Presidential Implementation Committee on the Allienation of Federal Government Properties which sold off the property in question on behalf of the Federal Government in 2006.

    Wetkas said the presidential committee informed his team that it did not have on its record, 15 A and B, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, as declared by Saraki in his 2003 asset declaration form.

    He said contrary to Saraki’s claim, the committee identified the property it sold as No.15, and Block 15, Flat 1 to 4, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

    Wetkas noted that, Saraki, on assuming office as Kwara State governor in 2003, declared that he acquired  15A and B, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, Lagos in 2000, whereas, the presidential committee wrote to his investigative team that it sold 15, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, Lagos to Saraki through his company, Tiny Tee Limited, in 2006.

    “The only authority that we could refer to was the presidential committee or the Lagos State Land Registry or the Presidential Implementation Committee. The other letters referred to by them (Saraki’s lawyers) were by private individuals.

    “We relied on the document from the Presidential Implementation Committee which said they only had 15, Mcdonald Road and Block 15, Flat 1 to 4, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, which was occupied by another lessee.

    “We relied on the numbering of the properties by the presidential implementation committee and they stated that 15, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi was sold to Tiny-Tee.  That was the strength of our conclusion,” the witness said.

    Wetkas said he did not physically inspect the property at 15, 15A and B, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, but ylthat other members of his investigative team did, and that they are in a better position to tell th tribunal what they found.

    On why he did not personally visit Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, Wetkas said he needed not to because the letter from the Presidential Implementation Committee to his team had clarified issues on the existence o otherwise o th property.

    “There was no need for me to ask the implementation committee to take me to the properties. The letter clarified that there were only two properties as 15 and Block 15, Flats 1 to 4,” the witness said.

    Wetkas confirmed that the asset at 15, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, was at various times offered to a company, Energy Marine Resources and occupant of the house, Mr. Virtus Nwosu.

    The witness also confirmed that it was eventually sold to Saraki’s company.

    Usoro confronted Wetkas with documents on the property which were obtained from the presidential committee and tendered as exhibits, to fault the prosecution’s case.

    The lawyer said the property described as 15 A and B, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, in Saraki’s asset declaration form of assumption of office in 2003, was not the same as the one described as 15, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, by the presidential committee.

    Usoro noted that the property as described by the presidential committee was also not the same described by Saraki in his asset declaration form of July 11, 2007, made after the Senate President ended his first term in office as governor.

    Saraki’s asset declaration form which he submitted on assumption of office in 2003 (Exhibit 3), did not give a picture of the property he claime to have on  15A and B, Mcdonald Road, Ikoyi, but the form he submitted on July 11, 2007 after he completed his first term as governor described 15A as a five-bedroom house and 15B as an undeveloped plot.

    A different document, identified by Usoro as Exhibit 14 – a report of the EFCC on Saraki’s assets in 2006 – provided a different description of the property.

    On the request by Usoro, Wetkas read from th document, to the effect that the property identified as 15A and B Mcdonald, Ikoyi were verified. “While the property at 15A is a big one, painted and fenced, the other one at 15 is unpainted and lacks character, although it is also fenced. The properties are residential and belong to the declarant (Saraki).”

    In yet a differnt document, which Usoro again, asked Wetkas to read, 15 Mcdonald, was described as a four-bedroom house.

    Wetkas confirmed that none of those descriptions fitted in with the description of 15 A and B Mcdnald in Exhibit 3, which was the end of tenure asset declaration form made by Saraki in 2007

    He insisted “they are not the same but that is immaterial to me. My understanding is that when you buy a property you can expand it.”

    Usoro disagreed, insisting that 15B described as an undeveloped plot in Exhibit 3 could never have been such property that was later expanded after it was purchased.

    Further hearing has been fixed for May 17.

     

  • FG re-arraigns Saraki on new charges

    FG re-arraigns Saraki on new charges

    The Federal Government on Thursday re-arraigned Senate President Bukola Saraki on amended three charges of alleged false asset declaration before the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    Saraki pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    In the fresh charge, the Federal Government accused Saraki of abusing his office while serving as Governor of Kwara State between Oct.2016 and May 2007 by obtaining a loan from GTBank to acquire property at No. 17A and 17B McDonald Street Ikoyi, Lagos.

    The Federal Government, through its counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), said Saraki failed to declare the property which was allegedly acquired in at N497.2 million.

    In the charge, Jacobs also accused Saraki of failure to declare his leasehold interest in property located at No.42, Remi Fani-Kayode Street, Ikeja, Lagos allegedly acquired through his company Skyview Properties Company.

    The charge further accused Saraki of allegedly receiving monthly salary between June 2011 and October 2013 when he was Senator.

    After hearing the charge, Saraki’s lawyer, Paul Usoroh SAN, asked the tribunal to adjourn the case to enable him to consult his client to respond to the new amended charges.

    The Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Danladi Umar, adjourned the case till May 10 for continuation of trail.