Tag: Federal High Court in Abuja

  • Withheld council funds: Court fixes September 29 to hear Osun’s motion on jurisdiction

    Withheld council funds: Court fixes September 29 to hear Osun’s motion on jurisdiction

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled hearing for September 29 on a motion filed by Osun State Government to challenge the hearing in Abuja of a suit against the state’s withheld local government funds.

    Justice Emeka Nwite chose the date yesterday after listening to lawyers to parties in the case.

    Addressing the court, plaintiff’s lawyer, Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), argued that since the court’s vacation came to an end on September 16, the case should be transferred to court’s division in Osogbo (capital of Osun State) for hearing and determination.

    The motion, challenging the jurisdiction of the court’s Abuja division, was hinged on two grounds.

    The first is that the fiat issued by the court’s chief judge for the case to be heard in Abuja division during the court’s annual vacation, has been overtaken by event because the vacation has ended.

    The second ground queries the validity of a purported letter from the Office of the Chief Judge of the court, mandating Justice Nwite to hear the case in Abuja.

    READ ALSO: How to curb Corruption in Nigeria

    The plaintiff noted that the letter was signed by a person who claimed to be the Personal Assistant to the Chief Judge’s Personal Assistant.

    It contends that the Personal Assistant to the Chief Judge’s Personal Assistant is a busy body and a person unknown to law, who lacks the legal capacity to sign such a sensitive document.

    Defence lawyers, Dr. Muritala Abdulrasheed (SAN) for the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), and Tajudeen Oladoja (SAN) for the Accountant General of the Federation (AG-F) faulted the plaintiff lawyer’s position.

    Abdulrasheed and Oladoja alleged that the motion filed by the plaintiff to challenge the court’s jurisdiction was a ploy to delay the expeditious hearing of the case.

    The two defence lawyers told the court that the tenure of the elected APC chairmen and councillors will come to an end on October 22 and as such, their case will become academic if not expeditiously heard.

    The judge had struck out the name of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), earlier listed as the third defendant in the suit, following the plaintiff’s decision to discontinue the case against him.

    Adetunbi said the case was discontinued against the AGF because another suit against him is pending before the Supreme Court.

    The suit, before the Federal High Court, was originally filed at the Osogbo division of the court by the Attorney General of Osun State, Oluwole Jimi-Bada, on behalf of the state government.

    The plaintiff is seeking to restrain the CBN and the AG-F from opening accounts for the chairmen elected on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2022 who, the state government claimed, have been sacked by the same Federal High Court, which sack it further claimed was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

    The plaintiff equally wants an order to restrain the CBN and AG-F “from disbursing allocations to the allegedly sacked APC chairmen and councillors.”

  • Osun councils funds: Court fixes Sept 22 to hear pending applications

    Osun councils funds: Court fixes Sept 22 to hear pending applications

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled hearing for September 22 in the suit filed by the Osun State Government over the alleged refusal of the Federal Government to release the state’s local government allocation.

    Justice Emeka Nwite chose the date at Monday’s proceedings after lawyers to parties identified the various applications filed, which they said were pending before the court.

    At the mention of the case, Musibau Adetunbi (SAN) who represented the Attorney General of Osun State, Oluwole Jimi-Bada, told the court that his client filed some motions, which have been served on the defendants.

    Adetunbi said the first is challenging the decision of the court’s Chief Judge to transfer the case from the Osogbo division of the court to Abuja.

    He said the second is for the discontinuance of the case against the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), who is listed as the third defendant in the case.

    The plaintiff stated, in the second motion, that “sequel to the affidavit of urgency filed by the AGF on August 13, it became obvious that he is willing and at the verge of paying the allocation of the constituent local government councils of the plaintiff’s state to the illegal and sacked All Progressives Congress (APC) Chairmen and Councilors.

    READ ALSO: Nigeria’s killer touts

    “Consequent on the above, the plaintiff is desirous of initiating and prosecuting a fresh suit against the third defendant (AGF) at the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

    “Some of the facts, questions and issues to be tabled at the apex court against the AGF would be identical to the facts, questions and issues before the trial court in the instant suit and hence, the need to discontinue the suit against him.”

    In the motion filed on August 26, the plaintiff wants the court to issue an order staying further proceedings in the suit pending the hearing and determination of another suit it filed before the Supreme Court, marked SC/CV/773/2025 which has the AGF as the sole defendant.

    The plaintiff stated that it filed the motion because “the AGF is not willing to obey, abide by or comply with valid and subsisting decision of the Court of Appeal but rather caused an affidavit of urgency to be filed before the court on August 13.”

    “The AGF’s letter of August 26 and the affidavit of urgency show that he is willing and at the verge of paying the allocation of the constituents local government councils of the plaintiff state to illegal and sacked APC Chairmen and Councilors.”

    Osun State claimed that the alleged brazen decision of the AGF necessitated its decision to approach the Supreme Court to determine the propriety or otherwise of the Federal Government’s alleged plan to pay the  statutory allocation of the Local Government Councils in the state to officials of the APC.

    It further claimed that the said APC officials have been removed from office by a subsisting judgement of a High Court which was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

    Lawyer to the AGF, Akin Olujimi (SAN), who disputed Adetunbi’s claim that all the documents filed by the plaintiff have been served on his client, said he was yet to be served with the motion on notice for the discontinuance of the plaintiff’s case against the AGF.

    Olujimi added that even if the notice of discontinuance was served on his client, the court’s scheduled business of the day should be allowed to go on, except the court decides otherwise.

    Lawyer to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Muritala Abdulrasheed (SAN) told the court that it was the AGF who wrote to the Chief Judge to request that the case be heard expeditiously by a vacation judge.

    Abdulrasheed said his client, listed as the first defendant, filed seven sets of documents, some of which are challenging the plaintiff’s motion for stay of proceedings and its motion challenging the administrative power of the court’s Chief Judge to transfer the case to Abuja.

    Lawyer to the Accountant General of the Federation (AG-F), Tajudeen Oladoja (SAN), listed as the second defendant, noted that should the court fail to hear the case during its ongoing vacation, it would become an academic exercise.

    Oladoja prayed the court to hear at once all the pending documents (processes) filed by all the parties in the case.

    The Osun Government, is by the suit, seeking to among others, restrain the CBN from opening accounts for the Chairmen elected on the platform of the APC in 2022 who the plaintiff claimed have been sacked by a judgment of the Federal High Court.

  • Trademark case file returned to FHC Chief Judge

    Trademark case file returned to FHC Chief Judge

    The Federal High Court in Abuja has transferred the N1.60 billion suit filed by Rite Foods Ltd, the manufacturer of Fearless Energy Drinks, against Mamuda Beverages Nigeria Limited for its lion logo on Pop Energy drink, claiming that it is identity theft.

     The file was sent back to the Federal High Court Chief Judge last week for reassignment.

    This was made known last week when the matter came up for hearing  before Justice Emeka Nwite.

    When Justice Nwite called the attention of the registrar to the case, she told the judge that since the matter was brought during the Easter vacation, it had been transferred back to the Chief Judge for reassignment.

     Rite Foods, in a fresh suit filed by its team of lawyers led by Oyetola Oshobi and Boonyameen Lawal, instituted the case over allegations bordering on trademark infringement and identity pass-off.

    The company also sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining Mamuda Beverages from further producing Pop Power Energy Drinks with a striking similarity to its products.

    In the writ of summons marked FHC/ABJ/CS/705/2025 filed on April 14, before Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, the plaintiff sued Mamuda Beverages, as the sole defendant.

    READ ALSO: FULL STEPS: How to generate e-affidavit for change of name, loss of SIM, others

    Rite Foods, which has its registered trademark number as 38227 and its registered design number as NG/DS/NT/2020/1099, had sought ten  reliefs from the court.

    It sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining Mamuda Beverages, its directors, distributors or any other person from infringing its registered trademark by engaging in the trade or business of manufacturing, supplying, distributing or selling the drinks in Nigeria.

    Rite Foods Ltd prayed the court for an order for the destruction of the offending Pop Power Energy Drink products and all other products held to infringe on its registered design and trademark in the defendant’s possession, custody, and/or control.

    It sought general damages of N1 billion for injury suffered by the plaintiff due to the defendant’s infringement and unlawful use of the plaintiff’s registered design and trademark and the cost of the suit for N60 million.

    Rite Foods said its novelty design and aesthetic of the “Fearless” energy drinks were registered as an industrial design under the Patents and Designs Act on 24 August 2020 by the registrar of patents and designs.

    According to the plaintiff, the defendant’s imitation, though in a smaller 330ml bottle, bears striking similarities in shape, colour, and logo placement, leading to widespread confusion among consumers and retailers, some of whom have referred to the infringing product as “small Fearless”.

    According to the firm, the defendant is producing Pop Power Energy Drinks in commercial quantities for public purchase.

    Following this development, Rite Foods Ltd filed a fresh suit against Mamuda Beverages Nig Ltd.

    But in its preliminary objection, Mamuda Beverages urged Justice Nwite to dismiss the suit as an abuse of the court process.

    The defendant said the case instituted on January 28, by the plaintiff via a motion ex parte, motion on notice, and a writ of summons, had the same parties in the instant suit.

    It admitted that on January 31, Rite Foods’ ex-parte application was granted, and the company executed the same on February 10.

  • Court upholds Sowore’s, Fabiyi’s suspension as AAC’s Chairman, Secretary

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has upheld the suspension of Omoyele Sowore and Malcom Fabiyi as the  National Chairman and Deputy National Chairman of the African Action Congress (AAC).

    In a judgment Friday, Justice Inyang Ekwo equally upheld the appointment of Dr. Leonard Nzewa as the party’s acting National Chairman.

    Justice Ekwo granted all the reliefs sought in the suit filed by Nzewa, among which was for the court to affirm the decision of the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) to suspend Sowore and Fabiyi for six months at its meeting held on March 27, 2019.

    Sowore, who is the publisher of online news platform, Saharareporters, was the party’s presidential candidate in the February 23, 2019 election.

    The party’s NEC suspended him, Fabiyi and some others for allegedly engaging in anti-party activities.

    Justice Ekwo dismissed the objection filed by Sowore and Fabiyi against the suit on the grounds that they failed to personally depose to the counter-affidavit filed against the suit.

    Read Also: AAC suspends Sowore, nine others for alleged infractions

    The judge held that the deposition made on their behalf by Dr. John Adeoye would not be considered because Adeoye was not a party to the suit.

    He noted that it was an elementary principle of law that it was only a party to a case that could depose to an affidavit evidence in defence of his or her case.

    Justice Ekwo said the reasons given by Sowore and Fabiyi for being unable to depose to the affidavit,was untenable.

    On Adeoye’s deposition to the effect that  Sowore and Fabiyi were unable to depose to the counter-affidavit personally because they were outside the country when the suit was filed, he said such an excuse did not portray them to be serious in defending the case.

    The judge noted that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) failed to file any defence in the case.

    The judge ruled: “It is my opinion that Dr. John Adeoye is not a party in this case and cannot give evidence. I find that the evidence of Dr. John Adeoye goes to nought.

    “Anybody who does not take a suit instituted against him seriously must prepare to bear the brunt of his carelessness.

    “I find that the evidence of the plaintiff has not been challenged or controverted. I thereby ascribe probative value to it.

    “On the whole, the case ought to succeed, and I so hold.”

  • Court frees director, brother on charges of non-declaration of assets

    •Says Obono-Obla panel can’t prosecute

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has freed the Director of Finance and Accounts in the Federal Ministry of Works, Power and Housing, Ibrahim Tumsah and his brother, Tijani Tumsah.

    They were arraigned for allegedly failing to declare their assets.

    Ibrahim and Tijani (Vice Chairman of the Presidential Initiative on Northeast) were arraigned on a two-count charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/4/2018, filed last year by the Special Presidential Investigation Panel on the Recovery of Public Property (SPIP), headed by Okoi Obono-Obla.

    The panel had, upon an order of court, seized 86 luxurious vehicles, four houses and a quarry plant in Abuja, which the panel claimed belonged to the two defendants.

    In a ruling yesterday, Justice Inyang Edem Ekwo upheld the defendant’s preliminary objection and said the SPIP lacked the power to file charges against anyone and could also not prosecute anyone for any infraction as it relates to the law that created it.

    The judge said there is nowhere in the SPIP establishment Act, where the panel is given power to engage in prosecution or filing of charges on behalf of the Federal Government (FG), the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) or the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as it has done.

    Justice Ekwo said by the law establishing the SPIP – the Recovery of Public Property Act Cap R 4, LFN 2004 – its powers end after concluding its investigation on any case and submitting its findings to the President of the country.

    Justice Ekwo noted that in Section 4(4) of the law, the panel is only empowered to conduct investigation and submits its reports and conclusions to the President. He added: “The function of the panel terminates at the conclusion of the investigation as provided in Section 4(4) of the Act.”

    The judge noted that the prosecution lawyer, Celcius Ukpong, contradicted himself in his argument when he, on one hand, contended that he did not need the fiat of the AGF, but on the other, said he can file charges on behalf of the AGF and the Federal Government.

    Justice Ekwo, who came down hard on the prosecution lawyer, faulted Ukpong’s description of the defendants as vultures, who he accused of unlawfully acquiring property, breaching code of conduct for public officers and reluctant to submit themselves for trial.

    The judge said Ukpong “has failed in his ethical standard for his use of foul language. I find the language of the prosecution in paragraph four of his written address offending.

    Justice Ekwo said on the whole, he found that the prosecution lawyer has not shown any law that gives the SPIP he represents, the power to file charge either in its name or in the name of the FG, FRN or the AGF.

    He added that it was a criminal endeavour for an agency to file charges or engage in criminal prosecution when it lacked the powers to so act.

    The judge said, by virtue of an earlier judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, to the effect that the SPIP cannot prosecute, his court’s jurisdiction is ousted on the charge against the Tumsah brothers, until the judgement is set aside by a superior court.

    The judge proceeded to dismiss the charge, discharging the two defendants.

  • Court remands woman for Indian hemp trafficking

    Court remands woman for Indian hemp trafficking

    A Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, remanded a 35-year-old woman, Salihu Binta, in prison custody for allegedly trafficking 30kg of cannabis sativa otherwise called Indian hemp.

    Binta, who was arraigned by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency ( NDLEA ), is standing trial on one count charge, bordering on unlawful possession of narcotic drugs.

    Counsel to the NDLEA, Mr Mike Kassa, told the court that the accused committed the offence on Aug. 20, 2017 along Abaji-Gwagwalada road, Abuja.

    Kassa said the accused, without any lawful authority, possessed 30kg of the narcotic drug, similar to cocaine, heroin and LSD.

    He said that the offence contravened Section 11 of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, Cap N30, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

    Read Also: Court docked four Justrite staff over alleged theft

    The accused, who was not represented by any counsel, pleaded not guilty to the one-count charge.

    The judge, Ahmed Mohammed, consequently remanded the accused in prison custody and adjourned the case to Jan. 15 for review of facts in the case.

    NAN

  • How Badeh’s wife, two sons escaped to U.S., says witness

    How Badeh’s wife, two sons escaped to U.S., says witness

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

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

    At a point, the prosecuting lawyer, Jacobs sought the court’s permission to play a video recording of how the EFCC allegedly recovered $1 million on 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.

    Earlier, in a ruling, Justice Okon Abang admitted as exhibits title documents of a N650 million Abuja property sold by Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose to buyers from who Badeh allegedly bought the property.

    The trial resumes on November 1.

  • Updated: Court orders PDP to suspend national convention

    Updated: Court orders PDP to suspend national convention

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) from proceeding with its planned national convention slated for Port-Harcourt, Rivers State on August 17.

    Justice Okon Abang, in a ruling Monday, granted an interim order directing parties in a suit before his court to suspend all plans and actions in relation to the convention pending the hearing and determination of a motion on notice for injunction filed by plaintiffs in the case.

    The case was filed by Ali Modu Sheriff and other members of the National Working Committee of the PDP, which he heads.

    The substantive suit was filed before the court’s vacation and assigned by the Chief Judge to Justice Abang’s court for hearing.

    The plaintiffs’ motion for injunction dated July 20, 2016 is seeking various reliefs, principal among which is an order restraining INEC from monitoring the national convention of PDP to be held on August 17 in Port Harcourt.

    The motion was slated for hearing on August 28, 2016 after the plaintiffs obtained the court’s leave for the motion on notice to be heard during its long vacation.

    The motion was not heard on July 28 as scheduled, on account of a motion for joinder filed by Senator Ahmed Makarfi and six other members of his Executive Committee.

    The motion was, again not heard yesterday owing to the various rulings of the court on some application, including the joinder application by Makarfi and others.

    In one of the ruling, the judge granted the prayer by Makarfi and others and joined them as defendants in the suit.

    Those joined were Makarfi, Ben Obi, Odion Ugbesia, Abdul Ningi,  Kabiru Usman, Dayo Adeyeye and Alhaja Aisha Aliyu. They were joined as 3rd to 9th defendants.

    After his clients were joined as parties in the suit, lawyer to Makarfi and others, Yunus Usman (SAN) applied for adjournment to enable him study the plaintiff’s motion for injunction, which was served on him in court yesterday by plaintiffs’ lawyer, Adeniyi Akintola (SAN).

    Adeniyi, who did not object to Usman’s application for adjournment, prayed the court to make an interim preservation order to restrain parties from taking steps to dissipate the res (substance of the case).

    Akintola, who drew the court’s attention to an order ex-parte obtained last week by a party in the case, Senator Ben Obi, from the Port-Harcourt division of the court, noted that the respondents have the habit of flouting court orders.

    He said the order obtained by Obi from the Port-Harcourt court was intended to frustrate proceedings before the Abuja court.

    Akintola said the court will be rendered helpless if no positive order was made and an adjournment was granted as sought by the defendants’ lawyer.

    Ruling, the judge said it was shocking that, despite being aware of the plaintiffs’ motion for injunction, and also being aware that a ruling was to be delivered in his application to be made a party in the case before the Abuja court, Senator Obi, on August 9, obtained an ex-parte injunction from the Port-Harcourt division of the court, directing INEC to monitor the convention and security agencies to provide security.

    “The action of Senator Ben Obi is unlawful and unfortunate. A court of coordinate jurisdiction cannot make an order that will neutralise the proceedings in another court of coordinate jurisdiction. The Port-Harcourt division of this court cannot make an order to neutralise proceedings in this court.

    “Any court of coordinate jurisdiction that takes delight in making ex-parte order in frustrating another court of coordinating jurisdiction’s proceedings is entirely on its own,” the judge said.

    He said he would have adjourned proceedings on the plaintiffs’ motion for injunction without making any preservative order, as requested by lawyer to Makarfi and others, Yunus Usman (SAN), but for an urgent and compelling need for such order in view of the action by Senator Obi and the need to take care of conflicting interests of parties before the court.

    “Senator Ben Obi, with the greatest respect to him, is a senior and responsible citizen of this country. He cannot undermine the authority of this court. He ought to have waited for the court to deliver ruling in his application, which has now been delivered in his favour.

    “Senator Ben Obi cannot slap the court in the face and expect the same court to grant him an adjournment in this matter without making any interim preservatory order.

    “Democracy is anchored on the rule of law, not on the rule of self-help; not on the rule of might. Democracy is not anchored on the whims and caprices of any person, no matter hi position in the society. If we are to sustain this democracy, nobody should be above the law.

    “Senator Ben Obi, with the greatest respect to him, cannot treat this court with disdain and levity. What is the need for rushing to another court for an order, when a court is already seised of your application? This is unfortunate and unfair,” the judge said.

    Relying on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Lagos State v. Ojukwu1986 1 NWLR pt 18 at page 621, he noted that on no account must a party to a suit resort to self- help.

    He said where a party takes the laws into his/her hands; the court must invoke its disciplinary jurisdiction to curb the excesses of the recalcitrant party, in exercise of the court’s power for the maintenance of its dignity and integrity.

    “In the light of this, lawyers and politicians must ensure that the hard earned democracy is protected to avoid anarchy. If there is a breakdown of law and order, it is the masses of this country that will suffer. The politicians and senior lawyers will quickly find their way out of the country. The court is here to ensure that there is no anarchy.

    “Therefore, in the exercise of my disciplinary jurisdiction, where a party has taken the law into its hands, and in line with the Supreme Court decision in the case of Lagos State and Ojukwu, in the interest of justice and competing interests of parties, an order is hereby made in the interim, suspending PDP convention slated for the 17th of August 2016 in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, pending when the plaintiff’s motion on notice dated 20th July 2016 is heard and determined,” the judge said and adjourned to 12 noon today, hearing of the plaintiffs’ motion on notice for injunction.

    Earlier, the judge dismissed a motion filed by on behalf of the PDP by Ferdinand Orbih (SAN) seeking an order for stay of proceedings in the case pending the determination of an appeal he filed against the court’ ruling of July 28, 2016.

    The court had, in the ruling, held that Orbih, who announced appearance for the PDP on the strength that he was briefed by the Makarfi leadership of the party, cannot appear in the case because the Makarfi group lacked the power to act on behalf of the party.

    The judge allowed Olagoke Fakunle (SAN) who was briefed by the Sherif faction to represent the PDP in the case.

    Ruling on Orbih’ application for stay of proceedings, Justice Abang held that the notice of appeal filed by Orbih was incompetent as he was not known by the court as a lawyer for the PDP.

    The judge said: “Mr. F. O Orbih (SAN) has no right of appeal over the decision of this court and against the ruling of this court recognising O. Fakunle (SAN) as the counsel for the PDP.”

    He said Orbih, having not been recognised as a party in the suit, he could only have appealed against decision of the court delivered on July 28 by first seeking the leave of the court to appeal as an interested person.

    “Having not obtained leave to appeal against the decision of the court, it is my view that he (Orbih) has compiled nothing and transmitted nothing (as regard the record of proceedings which he said he had compiled and transmitted).

    “Therefore, the compilation and transmission of records to the Court of Appeal is in nullity.”

    The judge also said Orbih failed to file a verifying affidavit, exhibitting the notice of appeal that he filed with respect of the case as he ought to do.

    “With the greatest respect to the learned counsel, he has laboured in vain. There is no evidence that the appeal has been transmitted,” he said.

    Justice Abang, who noted that the court spent about five hours in resolving Orbih’ application, awarded N50,000 cost against him, to be personally by him, in favour of the plaintiffs.

    Justice Abng equally dismissed a motion filed by one Sikirula Ogundele, asking for among other prayers, that the judge should disqualify himself from further hearing the case.

    In the motion which was said to have been filed on his behalf by his lawyer, Yemi Oke, Ogundele, who is not a party to the suit, accused the judge of bias.

    The judge was angered by the decision of the applicant to join him as a respondent in the appeal filed against the July 28 decision of the court by Ogundele.

    A lawyer, Dolapo Kehinde, who initially held the brief for Oke, withdrew his appearance in the case when he could no longer defend the content of the motion.

    Justice Abang, in upholding the request by Akintola and Fakunle for the dismissal of the motion, held that Ogundele “is a meddlesome interloper” in the case.He is a busybody wandering about.”

    He said Ogundele and his lawyers also flouted the provisions of section 188 of the Evidence Act which grants a judge judicial immunity against being sued over his decision in the course of his official duty.

    The judge said, but for the decision of Ogundele’s lawyer not to proceed with his application, he (the judge) would have cited him (Ogundele) for contempt for making contemptuous depositions in the affidavit supporting his application.

    Monday’s proceedings, which started at 9am, ended at 4.45pm.

    Parties are to return to court Tuesday at 12noon.

     

  • Dasukigate: Court grants bail to businessman allegedly paid N2.4bn

    Dasukigate: Court grants bail to businessman allegedly paid N2.4bn

     

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has granted bail to a businessman, Olugbenga Obadina, the Managing Director, Almond Projects Limited who was allegedly paid about N2.4billion by the Office of the National Security Adviser, ONSA, under Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd), without evidence of services rendered.

    Obadina was arraigned with his company last Friday by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on an eight-count charge for allegedly collecting N2, 417, 000,000.00 paid into his company’s account in tranches, between 2013 and 2015 from the account of the ONSA under Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd) without contract award.

    The offence is contrary to Section 15(2), (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 as amended in 2012 and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.

    Ruling on Monday, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba admitted Obadina at N500million  with two sureties who must each endorse a bond of N250m.

    The judge said the sureties can be a private businessman, professional or civil servant of the rank of a director.

    “The sureties must have landed properties either in Asokoro, Maitama, Apo Legislative quarters, Wuse II area of Abuja, or Victoria Island, Lagos State. The sureties are to provide evidence of income tax payment for three years,” the judge said.

    He directed Obadina to deposit his international passports with the registrar of the court, and must go to the EFCC to comply with Section 15 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, which entails submitting himself for biodata collection, fingerprinting, snapshot and necessary profiling.

    Obadina is to be remanded in prison custody pending satisfaction of his bail conditions.

    The judge adjourned to September 30 and October 4, 2016 for trial.

     

  • Badeh bought Abuja houses for sons at N970m – witness

    Badeh bought Abuja houses for sons at N970m – witness

    A Federal High Court in Abuja heard Tuesday that former Chief of General Staff, Alex Badeh bought choice houses in Abuja for his three sons at about N970m.

    Information to this effect is contained in the testimony of a retired Air Commodore, Aliyu Yishau, who was the Director of Finance and Account of the Nigerian Air Force (NAF) while Badeh was the Chief of Air Staff (between September 2012 and December 2013).

    Yishau, who concluded his evidence Tuesday as the first prosecution witness, in the trial of Badeh and a firm,  Iyalikam Nigeria Limited, said  he assisted Badeh to buy “a semi-detached bungalow” for one of the ex-Air Force chief’s sons at No.8A Embu street , by Sigma Apartments, Wuse 2, Abuja.

    The witness had earlier told the court that Badeh bought a house located at No: 19 Kumasi Crescent, Wuse II, Abuja for his first son, Alex Badeh (Jnr) at N260m, with N60m spent to renovate it, while N90m was expended in furnishing the property.

    While testifying on April 27, the witness also said Badeh bought another N320million house in Abuja for his 28-year old last son, Kam.

    “In my statement to the EFCC, I said the 1st defendant has two properties in Wuse 2 that cost N260m and N320m. The house that cost N320m is the house adjacent to No 19 Kumasi Crescent, which was purchased from Honourable Bature. That was the one purchased for the last son of the 1st defendant, by name Kam. I cannot remember the address, but can  identify it,” the witness said.

    Badeh and Iyalikam were arraigned on March 7 this year on a 10-count charge of breach of trust and corruption for allegedly diverting about N3.97bn from NAF’s account.

    Tuesday, Yishau, who was cross-examined by Badeh’s lawyer, Akin Olujinmi (SAN) insisted that he made payment for the property on behalf of the 1st defendant, who was his boss.

    Olujinmi showed the witness a copy of one of the five statements he made to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), dated February 11, 2016, which he identified as his own.

    When asked to identify where, in the statement, he stated that he participated in the purchase of the Embu street house, the witness said he was instrumental to how the house was bought for his boss’ son from one Alhaji Ishiaku Rabiu.

    “The house is a semi-detached bungalow, and was bought at N240m. We paid in US dollars cash. I said in the statement that I made the payment. Because, the statement is my statement, and all I said in it is about what I did, where other people did something else, they are identified.

    “I am the author of this statement; I am responsible for all that is said there. If somebody else made the payment, I would have said so. I approached Ishaku Rabiu for the purpose of purchasing the house.

    “The house is next to my house. He explained that the house was rented out. He told me the price was N240m and he sold it to me at that price.”

    The witness denied Olujinmi’s claim that the receipt for the property was issued in his name. He said “it is incorrect that I promised to suggest the details to be used at the time of the subdivision of the Certificate of Ownership (Cof O).

    “At the time of purchase of the house, I negotiated with Ishaku Rabiu, and I told my boss (Badeh). I gave Ishaku Rabiu the name of the person buying the house – Air Chief Badeh. And I told him (Rabiu) that he is buying the house for his son.”

    The witness said he was not aware that Ishaku Rabiu claimed, in his statement to the EFCC, that he (Yishau) did not tell him that he was buying it for somebody else.

    “The documents that were prepared were accordingly handed over to Barrister Timothy as directed by Air Marshal Badeh. But I do not have any evidence of acknowledgment of the receipt of the documents by Barrister Timothy,” he said.

    On why he was silent, in his statement to the EFCC, on how another of Badeh’s property at No.14 Azdope Crescent, Off Kumasi Crescent, Wuse 2 was purchased.

    The witness said he was only asked (by the investigators) about the ownership of the property and not how it was purchased.

    Yishau said he was the one who looked for and found the house. Said he did not negotiate with Bature, the owner of the house, with the purpose of buying it.

    “When my boss, Air Marshal Badeh asked him to get another house for his son, Kam, I told him about a house Hon Bature wanted to sell and that the house was adjacent to that of Alex Badeh Jr.

    “He became interested, but told me that he did not want people to know, that was when I suggested to him ( Badeh) that he can use Barrister Hussain Umar, who help in the purchase of Ogun River house, to deal directly with the owner of the property.

    “So I introduced Barrister Umar to Hon Bature. Barrister Hussein Umar did the negotiation, when he told me about the price, I told my boss,” the witness said.

    Olujinmi concluded his cross-examination of the witness Tuesday following which Justice Okon Abang adjourned to Wednesday for continuation of trial.