The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Federal High Court

  • Court admits Oronsaye’s co-defendant’s confessional statement

    Court admits Oronsaye’s co-defendant’s confessional statement

    After about 12 months of denial, a Federal High Court in Abuja Monday out a lie to claim by the Managing Director of Federick Hamilton Global Services Limited, Osarenkhoe Afe that he was compelled to make confessional statements to investigators with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Gabriel Kolawole, in a ruling Monday on a trial-within-trial conducted from June 21, 2016, held among others that Afe voluntarily made the statements, and proceeded to admit them in evidence.

    Afe is being tried with a former Head of Service to the Federation (HOSF), Steve Oronsaye on an amended 35-count charge in which they are accused of “stealing and obtaining money by false pretence” about N2billion.

    Shortly after their arraignment last year, Afe, through his lawyer Oluwole Aladedoye, objected to the admission, in evidence, Afe’s the statements, arguing that they were obtained from his client by “oppression”, a development that necessitated the conduct of the trial-within-trial, which began on June 21, 2016.

    The statements are confessional ones made by Afe to the EFCC on February 24, 2011 and March 16, 2011 in the course of investigating five companies – Hamilton Global Services Limited; Cluster Logistic Limited; Kangolo Dynamic Cleaning Limited, and Drew Investment & Construction Company Limited – alleged to have been used to perpetrate the fraud.

    Prosecuting lawyer, Oluwaleke Atolagbe called three witnesses to prove that Afe made the statements to EFCC’s investigators voluntarily.

    The witnesses, who were operatives on the EFCC’s Pension Task Force, testified to the effect that Afe made the confessional statements, and that “he was not coerced” into making them.

    Ruling yesterday, Justice Kolawole said: “The second defendant (Afe) was in a good state of mind when he made the statements.”

    The judge said if indeed, he was coerced into making the statements as claimed, he never took any steps, like writing “a letter of protest” and asking “the court to order the EFCC to produce the statement he was coerced to write.

    “If in the course of proceedings, there are new developments, which put the statement in great doubt; this court has the power to expunge it, as it is easier to do that, and I don’t have power to remove evidence that has already been objected,” the judge said.

    Justice Kolawole proceeded to admit the statements as exhibits in the case

    Earlier, the judge granted a motion brought by Oronsaye’s lawyer, Barth Ogar, praying the court to release his client’s international passport to enable him travel abroad for medicals.

    In granting the motion, the judge ordered Ogar to, in the next 48 hours, file a personal undertaking that the defendant shall return his passport on or before September 30 for purposes of his further trial.

    Justice Kolawole adjourned to October 12, 2017 for the “continuation of judicial trial of the defendants”.

    The EFCC, on May 18, 2016 re-arraigned Oronsaye and Afe before Justice Kolawole on the amended 35-count charge. Oronsaye, Afe, his company and other firms – Fedrick Hamilton Global Services Limited, Cluster Logistic Limitd, Kangolo Dynamic Cleaning Limited, and Drew Investment & Construction Company Limited – are named as defendants in the charge dated November 2, 2015’

    Count one of the charges reads: “That you Stephen Oronsaye, Abdulrasheed Abdullahi Maina (now at large) Osarenkhoe Afe and Fredrick Hamilton Global Services Limited on or about 2nd July, 2010 in Abuja, collaborated in disguising genuine nature of the sum of N161,472,000 derived from an illegal act to wit: conducting procurement fraud by means of fraudulent and corrupt act on the contract extension of biometric enrolment purportedly awarded to Innovative Solutions Limited by the Office of the Head of Service of the Federation without following due process and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 14 (1) (b) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004.”

    Another count reads: “That you Stephen Oronsaye and Abdulrasheed Abdullahi Maina (now at large) between April and May 2010 in Abuja, collaborated in disguising genuine nature  an aggregate sum of N131,038,425 derived from an illegal act to wit; conducting procurement fraud by means of fraudulent and corrupt act on the contract of biometric enrolment purportedly awarded to Moshfad Enterprises by the Office of the Head of Service of the Federation without following due process and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 14 (1) (b) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004.”

    The case was first taken before Justice Kolawole on July 13, 2015, where a 25-count charge was filed against Oronsaye and others, to which along with his co-defendants they pleaded not guilty. Before trial could commence before Justice Kolawole, the court’s Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta reassigned the case file to another judge, Justice John Tsoho.

    On March 1, 2016 when proceedings were to commence before Justice Tsoho, the judge stunned all when he said: “It has been realized that the case came to me in error, and I’ve been instructed that it should be returned to my brother judge, Justice Kolawole, who started it. He should continue where he stopped. I wish you the best of luck.”

    When parties returned to his court, Justice Kolawole said: “the Chief Judge wanted to redistribute cases to new judges transferred to the Federal High Court, Abuja in order to decongest the court, but this case file of Oronsaye was taken in error to Justice Tsoho. This explanation becomes necessary so the public will not be wondering why such back and forth movement.”

     

  • ‘illegal’ arms importation, bribery: FG opposes suspects’ bail

    ‘illegal’ arms importation, bribery: FG opposes suspects’ bail

    The Federal Government Monday urged the Federal High Court in Lagos not to grant bail to five men who were arraigned for importing arms and ammunition without authorisation.

    The defendants – Mahmud Hassan, Oscar Okafor, Donatus Achinulo, Mathew Okoye (at large) and Salihu Danjuma – were accused of illegally importing double barrel short guns, pump action rifles and single barrel shotguns (firearms).

    They were arraigned on nine counts of conspiracy to illegally import prohibited firearms, “uttering” of forged documents, bribery and importation of prohibited goods.

    Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) told the court that releasing the defendants on bail would be a risk.

    Prosecuting counsel K.A. Fagbemi, who represented the AGF, opposed the bail applications.

    According to him, Okoye was still at large, adding that it was not in the defendants’ interest to be released on bail.

    Defence counsel – Yakubu Galadima, Godwin Okaka, Olumide Oyewole and Adamu Ibrahim – said the defendants would not jump bail.

    Besides, Oyewole said his client was ill and needed medical treatment. He exhibited a medical report issued by the Isolo General Hospital.

    Count one of the charge said the defendants “on or about January 21, 2017, at Apapa, Lagos conspired together to illegally import into Nigeria 661 pump actions rifles.”

    The defendants, who were arraigned before Justice Ayokunle Faji, pleaded not guilty to all the counts.

    The prosecution said they brought the arms from Turkey through the Apapa Port in Lagos, using a 40-feet container, which they falsely claimed contained steel doors.

    The Federal Government said the defendants violated Section 98A (1)(b) of the Criminal Code Act by corruptly offering bribe of N400,000 and N1million to public officials on two occasions to present a search of the container.

    The defendants allegedly forged documents, such as a bill of lading, a Form M and a Pre-Arrival Assessment Report, in a bid to deceive the officials.

    The alleged offences contravene sections 1(2)(c), 1(14) (a)(i) and 3(6) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act Cap M17, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2014.

    Justice Faji adjourned for ruling on the bail applications. The trial will begin on September 12.

     

  • Alleged indebtedness: court again adjourns suit against Stella Oduah until Oct. 19

    Alleged indebtedness: court again adjourns suit against Stella Oduah until Oct. 19

    A Federal High Court, Lagos on Thursday further adjourned until Oct. 19 hearing in a suit filed by Sterling Bank against a former Aviation Minister, Sen. Stella Oduah, over alleged indebtedness.

    The bank alleged that Oduah and her company, Sea Petroleum and Gas company Ltd, were indebted to it to the tune of 16.4 million dollars and N100.5 million.

    The suit, which was earlier adjourned for hearing of all pending applications, was on Thursday, and further fixed for Oct. 19, due to the health condition of the trial judge, Justice Ayokunle Faji.

    Faji told counsels present in court that he would only be able to take cases for arraignment and rulings, while a new date would be issued for other cases.

    The suit was therefore, fixed for Oct. 19, after the court’s vacation.

    The suit was initially pending before Justice Abdulaziz Anka of the same court, but was eventually reassigned to Justice Faji to begin afresh.

    In March, Justice Anka had issued an order, restraining Oduah and her companies from making any withdrawal from its account and those of three other companies domiciled with 21 banks in the country.

    The other companies include: Sea Shipping Agency Ltd, Rotary Engineering Services Ltd, and Tour Afrique Company Ltd.

    The court had also issued an order directing the said commercial banks harbouring the assets of Oduah and the four companies to sequestrate their indebtedness as at November 2016.

    The court further ordered that the money be kept in an interest yielding account in the name of the chief Registrar of the Federal court, pending the determination of the suit.

    In an affidavit in support of the suit deposed to by a staff of Sterling Bank, Mr Segun Akinsanya, the bank averred that on Oct. 8, 2012, it granted a lease/Cabotage Vessel Finance Facility (CVFF) to Sea Petroleum and Gas Company.

    He said that the facility was in the said sums to finance one unit 5,000 MT tanker vessel.

    He also averred that the loan was secured by an unconditional personal guarantee of the companies’ Director, Princess Stella Oduah.

    Akinsanya also averred that same was supported by a statement of her net worth, legal mortgage of two properties worth N135 billion, and a power of Attorney of the tanker vessel in favour of Sterling Bank.

    He averred that also in support was a fully executed standing payment order and tripartite remittance agreement between it and Oduah.

    It was further averred that on June 27, 2013, Sea Petroleum Company requested and was granted additional facilities in the sum of about 450,000 dollars for post-delivery expenses.

    He said that also granted was about 993, 000 dollars to meet the requisite conditions in securing the release of the tanker.

    Also, he averred that upon the persistent failure of the defendants to liquidate their indebtedness, Sterling Bank instructed its counsels to recover the debt.

    He said that in spite of several reminders and demands, the defendants had failed and refused to liquidate their indebtedness which had culminated to 16.4 million dollars, and about N100.5 million as at November 2016.

    He averred that there was imminent risk of the defendants dissipating the assets of the companies, and had urged the court to issue a restraining order.

    Meanwhile, Oduah and her companies in their processes had urged the court to discharge the order made against them.

    They had also filed a preliminary objection to the suit, urging the court to strike it out for lack of jurisdiction.

     

  • BPP urges court to void N1.786b contract for PHCN’s liquidation

    BPP urges court to void N1.786b contract for PHCN’s liquidation

    The Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) has urged a Federal High Court in Abuja to void a N1.786,287,040 contract awarded for the wind-up/liquidation of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN), claiming it was illegal.

    It is BPP’s contention that the contract – for the provision of legal advisory services for the liquidation of PHCN – awarded in 2014 by the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE) to a law firm, JP Gadzama LLP (formerly J. K. Gadzama & Partners LLP) was without compliance with due process as required under the Public Procurement Act (PPA) 2007.

    The BPP stated that the BPE allegedly awarded the contract and made part-payment to the law firm, without first obtaining a “certificate of no objection” from it (BPP), as require997d under the PPA 2007.

    This formed part of BPP’s argument in documents filed by its lawyer, Wahab Olatoye in response to a suit by J. K. Gadzama LLP and Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN), marked FHC/ABJ/CS/997/2015.

    The plaintiffs had sued, alleging among others, that BPP unlawfully effected a downward review of the cost of the contract from N1.786, 287,040 to N929, 613,188.94 and queried BPP’s right to so act.

    In their amended originating summons, the plaintiffs claimed to have bided N2, 864,349,600 for the contract, while the BPE agreed to “a negotiated N1, 786,287,040.”

    The plaintiffs argued that the review allegedly effected on the contract sum by the BPP was unlawful, contending that under the Public Enterprise (Privatisation and Commercialisation) Act, the National Council on Privatisation (NCP), through the 2nd defendant (BPE) is the final authority in the award of such contracts.

    They also faulted the petitions written by the BPP on June 17, 2015, to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), querying the transparency of the contract award process and sought its investigation.

    The plaintiffs want the court to either restore the N2,864,349,600 contained in the original bid they submitted or the N1,786,287,040, “being the initial negotiated fee between the 1st plaintiff (J.K.Gadzama LLP)  and the 2nd defendant (BPE) “as the binding contract sum for the provision of legal advisory services for the liquidation of PHCN.”

    In its counter-affidavit, the BPP stated that it refused to issue a “certificate of no objection” (approval) for the award of the contract in line with its statutory functions and pursuant to the advice of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), who faulted the contract.

    Court documents revealed that the AGF, in a letter dated September 11, 2014, said any approval of the contract should be subject to review on the scope of work to be done, “mindful of the fact that the liquidation of PHCN is merely notional and will not involve most of the services outlined in the consultant’s scope of work.

    “Items 1, 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the scope of work for the Legal Advisory Services, as contained in Appendix B of the Draft Agreement are unnecessary for the liquidation of PHCN. Similarly, any of the remaining items 2, 4, 7 and 9 which is not contemplated by the procedure described in sections 457 – 468 (and there is hardly any contemplated) would equally be unnecessary to accomplish the liquidation.

    “I am to reiterate my earlier opinion that the proposed engagement of consultants for provision of legal Advisory Services for the liquidation of PHCN and valuation of PHCN’s non-core headquarters assets is inconsistent with the provisions and spirit the Electric Power Sector Reform (EPSR) Act, and that the proposed agreement to this effect, should not be executed by parties.”

    The BPP argued that, in awarding the contract to the 1st plaintiff (J.K.Gadzama LLP), the 2nd defendant (BPE) violated existing laws, more so, when it was not the nature of contracts that involved national security or defence to warrant it from being exempted from the application of the PPA 2007.

    It argued that from a community reading of sections 16(1) & (2), 41(10 of the PPA 2007 the award of consultancy contract for a legal advisory service is a public procurement within the meaning of Section 15(10 and 60 of the PPA 2007.

    The BPP, while challenging the BPE to produce the certificate of no objection, on which basis it purportedly awarded the contract, argued that its petitions to the EFCC and ICPC on the issue were not frivolous, but intended to ensure that due process was adhered to.

    It further said: “in the instant case, the 2nd defendant (BPE), in gross violation of instant law, particularly section 16(1)(2) of the PPA 2007, after being denied the request for the issuance of a certificate of no objection to award a consultancy contract for legal advisory services for the winding up of PHCN pursuant to Section 16(18) of the PPA 2007 and also, on the objection and advice by the AGF, BPE went ahead to award the contract.

    “It is noteworthy to state that the issue in contention is not the selection of the 1st plaintiff as the winner of the bid, but whether the award of the said contract to the 1st plaintiff by the 2nd defendant, without a certificate of no objection duly issued by the 1st defendant is lawful.

    “We submit that the award of the contract to the 1st plaintiff by the 2nd defendant, without due compliance with Section 16(1)(2) of the PPA is illegal, null and void and same should be set aside accordingly pursuant to Section 16(4) of the PPA 2007,” the BPP said.

    It equally objected to the suit on ground of jurisdiction, arguing that not only was there no cause of action against it and that the suit was statute barred within the contemplation of Section 2(a) of the Public Officers’ protection Act, having been filed about seven months after the downward review of the contract sum was effected.

    The BPP noted that while the plaintiffs stated that the downward review was effected in April 2015, they filed the suit on December 8, 2015.

    After taking arguments from parties on June 7 this year, Justice Adeniyi Ademola reserved judgment and said the court will inform parties when the judgment is ready.

     

  • Fani-Kayode challenges court’s jurisdiction to try him for ‘money laundering’

    Fani-Kayode challenges court’s jurisdiction to try him for ‘money laundering’

    …EFCC seeks to tender N30m cash receipts

     

    A former Minister of Aviation Chief Femi Fani-Kayode Wednesday asked the Federal High Court in Lagos to decline territorial jurisdiction in his trial for alleged money laundering.

    He prayed Justice Rilwan Aikawa to transfer the case to the court’s Abuja division where the alleged offence was committed.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) re-arraigned Fani-Kayode and former finance minister (state) Senator Nenadi Usman for alleged N4.6billion fraud.

    They pleaded not guilty to the 17-count charge of money laundering.

    The defendants were first arraigned last June 28 before Justice Muslim Hassan, but the judge recused himself on March 16 after Fani-Kayode accused him of likely bias.

    Justice Hassan was head of legal department at EFCC before his appointment as a judge and had overseen a previous money laundering charge against Fani-Kayode.

    The judge returned the case file to the Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, who re-assigned it to Justice Aikawa.

    Fani-Kayode’s lawyer Mr Norrison Quakers (SAN) said the court lacked the jurisdiction to try the former minister in Lagos.

    According to him, the facts of the case show that all the transactions which the former minister carried out as Director of Media and Publicity of the Goodluck Jonathan Campaign Organisation, for which he was charged, took place in Abuja.

    Besides, he said the defendant stays in Abuja and has another trial currently going in Abuja in another case.

    But, EFCC’s lawyer Rotimi Oyedepo urged the court to refuse the application as, according to him, the transaction instruments “were recovered in Lagos.”

    “The consequence of the alleged offence of money laundering is not limited to Abuja, but the entire federation. All the instruments of transaction were brought by Zenith Bank in Lagos.

    “The financial institutions used in the transactions have their head offices in Lagos,” Oyedepo said, adding that 13 of the prosecution’s 17 witnesses live in Lagos.

    Oyedepo said Fani-Kayode also raised the issue of transfer before Justice Hassan, yet when the file was returned to the Chief Judge, he re-assigned the case to another judge in Lagos rather than one in Abuja.

    He argued that the CJ had already exercised his discretion on where the case should be heard by re-assigning it to a judge in Lagos.

    Before the application for transfer was moved, Oyedepo had sought to tender receipts showing that Fani-Kayode made a cash payment of N30million to the first prosecution witness, a media consultant, Adewumi Idowu.

    The receipts acknowledge cash payments of N24million and N6million.

    “The documents were made by the witness. He identified them as the receipts he issued. They are extremely relevant to the facts in issue.

    “The receipts form the crux of counts 16 and 17 of the charge. We seek to tender the documents,” Oyedepo said.

    But, Quakers objected on the basis that the documents were not the original copies.

    He said the prosecution did not satisfy the requirements of Section 88 (c) of the Evidence Act which requires that there must be evidence of a thorough search for an original document before a duplicate can be accepted.

    Justice Aikawa adjourned till September 26 and 27 for ruling and continuation of trial.

     

  • Court’s inability to get translator stalls planned arraignment of kidnappers

    Court’s inability to get translator stalls planned arraignment of kidnappers

    The inability of the Federal High Court in Abuja to get a translator stalled the scheduled arraignment of some men alleged to be involved in the recent abduction of some pupils in schools in Lagos and Ogun states.

    The five men were accused of kidnapping some pupils and staff of Nigeria/Tulip International College in Isheri, Ogun State on January 13, 2017, and another six victims along the Ikorodu Expressway, Lagos, on December 16, 2016.

    They are Bekewei Agbojule (aka Asari), Egbasimokumo Ayeomi (aka Effiong), Godspower Olopele, Toki Okuba and Super Allen Baye (aka Yanga).

    Agbojule, Ayeomi and Baye  are said to be from the Ijaw community of Arogbo town in the riverine area of Ondo State, while the other two – Olopele and Okuba – are said to be residents of Ikorodu in Lagos and Isheri in Ogun State.

    The office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), on June 1, 2017 filed a five-count charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/85/2017 against the five alleged abductors after taking over the case from the police.

    The charge was signed on behalf of the AGF by an Assistant Chief State Counsel in the Federal Ministry of Justice, Aminu Alilu.

    When defendants  were brought to court yesterday by the police, Alilu (who is leading the prosecution team) and lawyers to the defence were in court.

    Proceedings were however stall shortly after the defendants were called into the dock and some of them said they do not understand English well, but pidgin English.

    After some minutes of trying to get a translator, without success, Justice John Tsoho elected to adjourn proceedings to today (Wednesday) to allow for the production of a translator.

    In the charge, the office of the AGF described the acts of hostage taking and receiving of ransoms, which the defendants were accused of, as acts of terrorism punishable by life imprisonment under the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013.

    The defendants are, in the first three counts of the charge, are accused of conspiring among themselves and with others at large  and demanded for N800m ransom after they “seized” and “detained” the pupils and staff members of Nigeria/Tulip International College, Isheri, Ogun State.

    They were said to have demanded N800m as ransom, but  later reduced it to N50m which they allegedly received before releasing the victims.

    The seven pupils and staff members of Nigeria/Tulip International College, Isheri, Ogun State, allegedly abducted by the defendants were Stephanie Nwosu, Zainab Olatubosun, Rebecca Agodi, Radiyan Aminu, Rashidat Ibrahim, Hanat Aderinto and Deriyo Yaziel.

    In counts four and five, the defendants, along with others (now at large) are said to have, on December 16, 2016, at Asolo Bridge, Ikorodu Expressway, Lagos, seized at gun point one Joshua Olayinka, Rita Morah, Kendra Abiose and four others.

    The defendants were said to have after seizing the six victims in Ikorodu, gone ahead to detain them at Ibafo Creek, Ogun State.

    They allegedly demanded a N2m ransom from the family members of the victims and received the money before releasing their victims

    The office of the AGF alleged that the offence of conspiracy to commit hostage taking was an act of terrorism contrary to section 17 of Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013, and punishable under the same section of the Act.

    The office said the offences of seizing, hostage taking and demanding ransome were also acts of terrorism said to be contrary to 15 (1) of Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, and punishable under the same section of the Act.

     

  • 24-year-old jailed for selling hemp

    24-year-old jailed for selling hemp

    The Federal High Court in Lagos Tuesday sentenced a 24-year-old man, Abiodun Ayinla, to three years imprisonment for dealing in Indian Hemp.

    Ayinla was charged by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) on one count of drug trafficking.

    The prosecutor, Mr Jeremiah Aernan, said the convict unlawfully trafficked 650 grammes of Cannabis Sativa (Indian hemp) on May 5 at a dumping site beside Aturase Estate in Gbagada, Lagos.

    Ayinla pleaded guilty to the offence which contravenes Section 11 (c) of the NDLEA Act, Cap N30 Laws of the Federation, 2004.

    The prosecutor tendered the convict’s statement, a request for scientific aid form, a drug analysis form and the cannabis sativa seized from Ayinla.

    Justice Babs Kuewumi found the accused guilty as charged.

    The three-year is to begin from the date of arrest.

     

  • Drug trafficker jailed three years in Lagos

    Drug trafficker jailed three years in Lagos

    A 24-year-old man, Abiodun Ayinla, who peddled 650 grammes of Cannabis Sativa (hemp), is to spend the next three years behind bars, a Federal High Court ruled in Lagos on Tuesday.

    Ayinla was arraigned on a charge of drug trafficking by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA). He had pleaded guilty to the charge.

    Delivering his judgement, Justice Babs Kuewumi said the court had found the accused guilty as charged.

    He, accordingly, sentenced him to a three-year jail term beginning from the date of his arrest.

    The prosecutor, Mr. Jeremiah Aernan, had told the court that the accused unlawfully trafficked 650 grammes of Cannabis Sativa (hemp) on May 5 at a dumpsite beside Atunrase Estate in Gbagada Lagos.

    Ayinla was immediately arrested and detained, he said.

    In proving that the accused was guilty of the offence, Aernan tendered a written statement by the accused, a request for scientific aid form and a drug analysis form.

    Aernan also tendered the remnants of the narcotics before the court as evidence and were admitted by the court and marked as exhibits.

    The offence of drug trafficking contravenes the provisions of Section 11 (c) of the NDLEA Act, Laws of the Federation, 2004.

  • How to achieve efficient justice delivery, by judge, SANs

    How to achieve efficient justice delivery, by judge, SANs

    Senior lawyers and a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, Monday said the imposition of punitive cost for time wasting, use of electronic recording devices and effective use of case management powers by judges will enhance speedier justice delivery.

    They spoke in Lagos during the second day of the 11th Annual Business Law conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (NBA-SBL), with the theme: Law and changing face of legal practice.

    Justice Dimgba, who was a panelist in the third session with the theme: Creating an efficient system of justice delivery, urged judges to make better use of their case management powers.

    He said fear of being accused of bias sometimes forces judges to grant frivolous applications for adjournments.

    According to him, judges operate in a “difficult terrain” in which false reports are sometimes sponsored against them in the media by litigants whose prayers for adjournment were refused.

    “Sometimes fear and intimidation impedes the exercise of their (judges’) case management powers. Some of my colleagues are afraid of petitions being written against them. It is true that some careers have damaged by such petitions, but I always ask them, is a petition going to kill you? As long as my conscience is clean, I do my job,” he said.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr Babatunde Ajibade, called for imposition of full indemnity cost against those who file frivolous cases, as is done in other jurisdictions.

    According to him, if people pay heavily for time wasting, they would be discouraged from deliberately delaying court actions, especially when they have bad cases.

    “If people have a dispute and know it will never be settled in court, they can just send assassins to kill the other person. If we have an efficient judicial system, crime will reduce and people won’t take laws into their hands,” he said.

    A United Kingdom based lawyer, Segun Osuntokun, wondered why Nigerian judges still record proceedings in long hand rather than with electronic devices.

    “In UK courts, there is real time transcription of what is being said. Everyone sees it instantly. Here, everyone waits for the judge to write in long hand,” he said.

    Osuntokun also faulted the practice whereby cases which had spent years in court begin all over (de novo) when the judges handling them are elevated to Court of Appeal.

    “In England, when you are elevated, you finish your portfolio of cases before leaving. That way, you save at least two years of cases having to start afresh before a new judge,” he said.

    Another SAN, Chief Chief Arthur Obi Okafor, said courts could schedule cases so that lawyers know when to be in court, rather than everyone being in court at the same time and some waiting all day for their turn.

     

  • EFCC charges judge with unlawful enrichment 

    EFCC charges judge with unlawful enrichment 

    …Commission kicks as Justice Nganjiwa fails to appear for arraignment

     

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Tuesday brought a charge of unlawful enrichment to the tune of $260,000 and N8, 650,000 against Justice Hyeladzira Ajiya Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court, Bayelsa Division.

    The EFCC filed the 14-count charge before Justice Adedayo Akintoye of the Lagos High Court in Igbosere.

    But Justice Nganjiwa, who filed a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the charge, was not available for arraignment.

    His lawyer, Robert Clarke (SAN), said the judge failed to catch a flight from Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State capital.

    According to the charge seen by The Nation, Justice Nganjiwa allegedly unlawfully received the N81, 705,000 in naira and United States dollars.

    The money was allegedly received in the judge’s Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB) account in tranches of $144,000, $102,000, $10,000 and $4,000 (amounting to $260,000).

    He also allegedly received through his Access Bank corporate account in the name of Awa-Ajia Nigeria Ltd, the sums of N750,000, N300,000, N5,000,000, N5000,000, N500,000, N500,000, N500,000, N100,000 and N500,000 (totalling N8,650,000).

    Justice Adedayo adjourned till June 23 for ruling on the objection.

    Details later…