The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Federal High Court

DSS refuses to produce Suswam in trial by EFCC

The failure by the Department of State Service (DSS) to produce former Benue State governor, Gabriel Suswam stalled proceedings in his trial before a Federal High Court in Abuja Tuesday.

Suswan and Omadachi Oklobia (who served as Finance Commissioner in Suwam’s government) are being triedby the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) for allegedly diverting N3.1billion belonging to Benue State Government.

They are, among others, accused of diverting proceeds of the sale of shares owned by the Benue Government and Benue Investment and Property Company Limited, for their personal uses.

The case was fixed for Tuesday for the continuation of the prosecution’s case. But at the commencement of proceedings, prosecuting lawyer, Oluwaleke Atolagbe drew the court’s attention to Suwam’s absence in court.

He noted that Suswam was on bail and wondered why he was absent, but said his (Suswam’s) lawyer should be allowed to explain his absence.

Suswam’s lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN) said his client’s absence was not out of disrespect to the court, but to no fault of his.

Daudu said Suswam was invited by the DSS on February 24 this year. And that since then, he has been kept in detention without charge.

He said no effort has been made by the DSS to take him (Suswam) to court in respect of whatever allegation they may have against him.

Daudu said: “The 1st defendant (Suswam) is being prosecuted by the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) in this case. The last place he was seen is in the custody of an agency of the FGN, the DSS.

“So, if the prosecution is not aware, I am, by this statement from the Bar, making him to be aware, so that he can enquire why the 1st defendant is being kept by the DSS.

“We do not know what has happened to him. We do not know why he is being kept. We want to say his absence is not out of his disrespect to this court. His absence is not wilful or deliberate,” Daudu said.

Responding, Atolagbe said the agency prosecuting Suswam in this case was the EFCC, which is different from the DSS, which currently is holding him.

Atolagbe added that “they are two different agencies entirely.” He however, agreed to Daudu’s observation that there was need for an adjournment in view of Suswam’s absence.

Ruling, Justice Ahmed Mohammed noted that the case, being a criminal matter, could not proceed in the absence of the 1st defendant. He adjourned to May 9 for continuation of trial.

March 28, 2017
Court strikes out ex-NNPC boss, Yakubu’s N1b suit against EFCC, AGF

A Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out a N1billlion fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Andrew Yakubu.

Yakubu had sued the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) over his detention by the former in relation to the about N3billion cash allegedly recovered in his Kaduna home.

The ex-NNPC boss has since been arraigned on a charge filed by the EFCC and has been granted bail.

Yakubu’s lawyer, Adeola Adedipe told the court today that, in view of the intervening circumstances, from when the case was filed and now, his client has decided to discontinue with the case.

Adedipe noted that since his client has been properly charged to court and bail granted to him, “We considered it necessary to discontinue this action.

“With a view to securing an order of striking out, we have filed a motion this morning, seeking the court’s leave to discontinue the case. We have served on parties,” Adedipe said.

Lawyers to EFCC and AGF, Mrs. Rita Ogar and T. D. Agbe confirmed being served with Yakubu’s motion. They did not oppose it.

Ruling, Justice Ahmed Mohammed struck out the case in view of the non-opposition by the respondents.

March 28, 2017
I was asked to pay $11,550 for doubtful PHD degree – JAMB Registrar

The Registrar of the Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB), Prof Is-haq Oloyede told a Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday how he was almost swindled of $11,550 by some individuals behind a suspicious university who offered to award him a doctorate degree at that amount.

Prof Oloyede, who was in court to testify as the second prosecution witness in the trial of Prof David Iornem, said the incident happened in 2012 when he was the Vice Chancellor of the University of Ilorin.

Prof Iornem is being tried by the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offenses Commission (ICPC) on a 3-count for allegedly operating an illegal university and obtaining under false pretence.

Led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, E. C. Otti, said he became suspicious when he received a letter from one Prof David Iornem, informing him about the offer of professional and academic doctorate degree of the Commonwealth University, Belize, and requiring him to pay a total of $11,550.

Prof Oloyede said, on receiving the letter from Prof Iornem, and having not applied for the degree, he became suspicious about the offer from the supposed Commonwealth University, a development that informed his decision to report to the National University Commission for investigation.

The JAMB registrar said he had never met Prof Iornem before Wednesday when he saw him in person in court.

“When I was the Vice Chancellor of the University of Ilorin and also, the Chairman, Committee of Vice Chancellors of Nigerian Universities, I got a letter from Prof David Iornem, offering me a professional and academic doctorate degree for the sum of $11,550.

“I suspected that that was not proper for an academic and professional doctorate degree to be so awarded without any application. I did not apply. I considered the offer unethical. I therefore, wrote to the regulator of universities, the Executive Secretary, National University Commission (NUC). And I attached the letter I received from the Commonwealth University.

“My intention was to ensure that the NUC investigate to establish the propriety or impropriety of the action. The degree he (Prof Iornem) offered to award me was a professional and academic degree of Commonwealth University, Belize.

“From exposure, I have about four decades of university life as a teacher and I am very familiar with university system all over the world. I also suspected, given my position in the university globally, I suspected that that university was non-existent.

“I knew this because as at then, I was on the board of the International Association of Universities (IAU), I was a member of the Governing Board of the Association of Commonwealth Universities; I was also a member of the Board of the Association of African Universities.

“I was the President of the Association of African Universities. I was also the Interim Secretary General of the Association of West African Universities.

“All these compelled me to raise the alarm, which is did to the NUC. I considered it a duty.

“The process of obtaining a professional or academic degree is for the candidate to apply, after which he will be notified about the outcome of his/her application.

“This is different from a honorary degree. The letter to me stated that it was academic and professional degree, not honorary. If it were honorary, I would have turned it down,” Prof Oloyede said.

The JAMB boss, who stood in the witness box for over three hours, said after his letter to the NUC, he was invited by the ICPC to make written statement, which he did.

H said by the letter from the Commonwealth University, he was required to pay $9,500 for the doctorate degree, $1,500 for seminar and $550 for academic gown.

After he identified the letter from the Commonwealth University, his letter to NUC dated July 23, 2012 and his statement to the ICPC, the three documents were admitted in evidence by the court.

Under cross examination by defence lawyer, Chris Alashi, Prof Oloyede said he had First Class in his first degree in Arabic, a Masters in Islamic Studies and PHD in Islamic Studies, with specialisation in Islamic Jurisprudence.

He said he has over 50 academic publications to his credit and has attended over 500 academic related seminars and workshops both locally and internationally in his over 40 years as an academic.

He said he became a professor in 1995. He said he was aware that of recent, some countries have started to award professional doctorate degrees in professional fields.

Trial judge, Justice Ahmed Mohammed later adjourn further proceedings to June 8, for Prof Oloyede to continue his testimony.

March 22, 2017
Court urged to restrain Senate over insistence on uniform for Customs boss

The Federal High Court in Abuja has been asked to restrain the Senate from further compelling the Comptroller General of Nigerian Customs Service (NCS) Col. Hameed Ali (rtd.) to wear the uniform of the NCS in the performance of his duties.

The request is contained in a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/207/2017, filed before the court yesterday by a lawyer, Mohammed Ibrahim.

The plaintiff is contending, among others, that it was not within the powers of the Senate to dictate to Ali, appointed by the President pursuant to his (President’s) powers under sections 5 and 171 of the Constitution, how to conduct himself.

He argued that Ali’s appointment, having been made subject to the provisions of sections 5 and 171 of the constitution, was not subject to provisions of Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) or any other law.

Ibrahim also argued that, Ali, not being a commissioned officer of the NCS, is not mandated by law to wear NCS uniform.

He further argued that the oversight functions of the National Assembly (particularly, the Senate) did not extend to compelling and instructing Ali to appear before it in uniform.

Ibrahim, who raised a series of questions for the court’s determination, urged it to, among others, declare that Ali’s appointment as CGC cannot be subject to the provisions of Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) or any other law.

He also seeks a declaration that Ali, who is not a commissioned officer of the NCS, is not mandated by law to wear NCS uniform and that the oversight functions of the NASS does not extend to compelling and mandating Col. Ali to appear before it in uniform.

The plaintiff prayed for an order of perpetual injunction restraining both the National Assembly and the Senate from compelling Ali to wear uniform in the performance of his duties.

Defendants in the suit include the Comptroller General of Customs, the Nigerian Customs Service, the National Assembly, the Senate and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

The case is yet to be assigned to any judge for hearing.

March 21, 2017
Ex-NNPC boss, Yakubu gets bail at N300m

Former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Andrew Yakubu has been granted bail at N300million.

Yakubu, has been in custody at the Kuje prison since he was arraigned on March 16 before a Federal High Court in Abuja on a 6-count charge filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

He is charged with false assets declaration, money laundering and fraud in relation with the about N3billion cash allegedly recovered in his house in Kaduna.

Ruling on a Yakubu’s bail application, Justice Ahmed Mohammed said he was convinced that Yakubu could not jump bail by virtue of his conduct in honouring the invitation of the EFCC even when he was outside the country.

The judge said if Yakubu wanted to escape trial, as alleged by the EFCC, he would not have voluntarily returned to honour the commission’s invitation, a claim the EFCC did not deny.

Justice Mohammed said the prosecution’s opposition to the bail application was based on speculation and apprehension. The judge proceeded to grant Yabubu bail at N300m with two sureties in the same amount.

The sureties, the judge said, must own properties within the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), which must worth the bail amount.

He refused to grant the prayer releasing Yakubu’s international passport and the one seeking to compel the EFCC to release Yakubu’s international passports still in its custody. The judge said he cannot grant such prayers at the moment in the case.

He ordered Yakubu to remain in prison custody until he meets the bail conditions.

Justice Mohammed adjourned to May 9 for trial.

March 21, 2017
Court rules on Kanu’s bail application April 25

The Federal High Court sitting Abuja will on April 25 rule on whether or not the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu and three others, should be granted bail.

Justice Binta Nyako gave the date after hearing arguments from counsel to Kanu and three co-defendants – Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi.

Counsel to Kanu, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, in his argument, told the court that the proof of evidence filed by the prosecution against his client was not strong enough to warrant his continued detention.

He said the proof of evidence is empty and not strong enough to sustain the charge against his client, adding that his health is deteriorating.

The counsel said, “We have attached nine exhibits to our application; one of them is an order of this court made by your learned colleague, Justice Adeniyi Ademola, that he be granted bail which has not been complied with.

“We also attached a letter we wrote to the Controller-General of Prisons informing him of an attempt to terminate the life of the defendant.

“Canisters of tear gas were left in his cell which he inhaled and this has affected his lungs and he can barely stand and if not released on bail, his health will get worse in prison.”

He acknowledged that bail was at the discretion of the court, urging the judge to exercise the discretion in favour of his client in the most liberal terms.

NAN

March 20, 2017
Court rejects Moro’s prayer for foreign medical trip

Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court, Abuja Friday rejected an application by former Interior Minister, Abba Moro for permission to travel abroad on health ground

Moro is being tried with some senior officials of the ministry, on an 11-count charge of procurement fraud and money laundering brought against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, (EFCC)

The others are a former Permanent Secretary in the ministry, Anastasia Daniel-Nwobia, a deputy director in the ministry, F. O Alayebami, Mahmood Ahmadu (at large), and Drexel Tech Nigeria Limited, a firm that was given the recruitment job, in the ill-fated Nigerian Immigration Service, NIS, recruitment exercise in 2014.

Moro had, in the application filed by his lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), sought the court’s permission to travel abroad for a medical appointment.

Ruling Friday, Justice Dimgba noted that, the application, dated December 16, 2016 addressed the request for the defendant to travel out of the country for a medical appointment scheduled for January 2017.

“A medical appointment for January 2017 cannot be given in March”, the judge said.

He asked that Erokoro to update the application, and adjourned to Tuesday, March 21, 2017 for hearing on pending applications.

Earlier, a Director of Compliance at the Bureau of Public Procurement, (BPP), Ishaq Yahaya was called for further cross-examination. He I the 3rd prosecution witness.

He had, at the last sitting, on March 16, while being cross-examined by Erokoro and Chris Uche (SAN) – lawyers to 1st and 2nd defendants – said Drexel Tech Global Services “is non-existent”.

Answering questions by S. I. Ameh, SAN, counsel to the fourth defendant, Drexel Tech Nigeria Limited, Yahaya gave additional insight into how the recruitment exercise of March 17, 2013 that led to the death of scores of Nigerian job applicants was carried out without due process.

He informed the court of the prescribed methods by the Public Procurement Act for procurement of services.

He said: “While the use of ICT cannot be tagged as a criminal activity, the method prescribed by the Public Procurement Act (PPA) for procurement of services are: the Open Competitive Method, the Special and Restricted Methods, under which are Selective Tendering, Direct Procurement, Emergency Procurement and Two-Stage Tendering. Consultancy falls under all the methods”.

Regarding the contract (Exhibit AAFD 13), Yahaya said, “The parties to the e-recruitment platform contract were the Ministry of Interior and Drexel Tech Nigeria Ltd. The contractual agreement between the Interior Ministry and Drexel was a Public-Private Partnership project, as indicated by the Minister. Drexel was engaged to provide the e-recruitment platform for the Government.

“The item and the amount relating to the operational cost of N83million were not captured in the document. No sum from the Federal Government was invested in this project. Information on a sharing ratio of 70:30 between the Federal Government and the contractor was not captured in the document”.

He added that there was no supplementary document or addendum with the documents supplied by the Ministry for the purpose of review.

On why the BPP did not write to Drexel Tech Nig Ltd for their account of events, Yahaya said, “We were reviewing the contract and not Drexel, the organization”.

March 17, 2017
Court sets aside forfeiture orders on OPL 245

..Malabu Oil sues FG, Shell, Agip EFCC, Etete

A Federal High Court in Abuja has set aside its orders made on January 26, 2017 for a temporary forfeiture of Oil Prospecting License (OPL) 245 to the Federal Government pending the conclusion of investigation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The OPL 245 is in relation to the oil well, which is the subject of the controversial Malabu Oil deal, in respect of which the EFCC has filed three separate charges against former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Mohammed Adoke, former Petroleum Minster, Dan Etete and others.

Justice John Tsoho, in a ruling Friday, upheld the applications by Nigerian Agip Exploration Limited (NAE) and Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Ltd (SNEPCO), challenging the validity of the orders.

Justice Tsoho held that the orders for forfeiture were irregularly made because the application ex-parte filed by the EFCC Chairman, and on which basis the orders were made, was irregularly filed.

The order was wrongly made,as the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, in whose name the ex parte application was filed failed to meet the pre-condition required before filing it.

Justice Tsoho ruled, “Therefore by the case of Onagoruwa Vs IGP, I hold respectively that the chairman of EFCC filed to meet the pre-condition for making an application for interim attachment of property. The application is therefore irregular and the order granted ought to be discharged.

“Accordingly this court granted ex parte on January 26, 2017 on the application of the Chairman of EFCC is hereby discharged or set aside.

“At this juncture, it is important to advise that with the setting aside of the ex parte order proceedings in this matter have finally closed,” Justice Tsoho said.

Shell’s lawyer, Konyinsola Ajayi had argued that by virtue of sections 28 and 29 of EFCC Act, the Chairman of EFCC, in whose name the ex parte application filed by the anti-graft agency was initiated, was not the proper person to institute the action.

He insisted that sections 28 and 29 of the EFCC Act envisage that the ex parte application for interim forfeiture is filed in the name of the EFCC and not its chairman.

The judge also dismissed an application filed by Malabu Oil and Gas Limited seeking to, among others, stay the earlier reserved ruling on the applications by Agip and Shell.

Malabu had sought to stay the delivery of the ruling to enable it be made a party in the case, because it would be affected by the court’s decision in the applications Agip and Shell.

The judge said the application by Malabu was misdirected, constituted an abuse of court’s process and intended to waste the court’s time.

Justice Tsoho advised parties, who have issues with the Malabu deal – OPL 245, to file fresh cases to ventilate their grievances and seek remedies.

In line with the judge’s advice, major stakeholders in Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, including Mohammed Abacha and businessman, Otunba Oyewole Fasawe promptly filed a fresh suit yesterday before the Federal High Court, Abuja, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/20/2017, praying for among others, an order restoring to it, it’ “rights to exclusive possession of OPL 245”.

In the suit filed in the name of Malabu Oil and Gas, the plaintiff wants the court to restrain the EFCC as continuing to treat the OPL 245 as proceed of crime, and also stop the anti-graft agency from interfering with its (Malabu’s) “right to explore and prospect for petroleum in the area of OPL 245”.

In the writ of summons, the plaintiff claimed that it was registered in 1998, and its (Malabu’s subscribers/first directors “are Sani Mohammed, a son of the late military Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha, Amafagh Kweku and Hindu Hassan, with 10million, six million nd four millions shares respectively making up the 20million share capital of the company.

The plaintiff, in its statement of claim, said it was granted OPL 245 by the Minister of Petroleum Resource on April 29, 1998 and the n paid N50, 000 as application fees, $10,000 as bid processing fees and part payment of or deposit of $2,040,000 as signature bonus.

It claimed that the OPL 245 was revoked from it on July 2, 2001, but through a settlement agreement the licence was re-allocated by the Federal Government to it on July 2, 2010.

The plaintiff added that, while its right in OPL 245 was subsisting, the Federal Government (first defendant), Shell Nigeria Ultra-Deep Limited (third defendant), SNEPCO (fourth defendant) and Agip (fifth defendant) and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation “surreptitiously entered into what they called “Block 245 Resolution Agreement dated April 29, 2011” allocating OPL 245 to SNEPCO and Agip.

It wants the court to order that it was not a party to the “Block 245 Resolution Agreement dated April 29, 2011” and so it “is not bound by the terms of the said agreement as it relates to or concerns OPL 245”.

The plaintiff equally seeks, “an order compelling the defendants by themselves, their servants or agents or departments to forthwith restore to the plaintiff (Malabu) the plaintiff’s rights to the exclusive possession of OPL 245.

“An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and in particular the sixth defendant (EFCC) by themselves, their servants or agents or howsoever otherwise from treating and or dealing with OPL 245 as a proceed of an offence and from interfering in any manner whatsoever and howsoever with the plaintiff’s exclusive right to explore and prospect for petroleum in the area of OPL 245.

“An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their servants or agents howsoever, otherwise from carrying out any exploration or prospecting activities in connection with or in relation to the area covered by OPL 245.”

Defendants to the suit are, the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Minister of Petroleum Resources, Shell Nigeria Ultra-Deep Limited, Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Limited, Nigerian Agip Exploration Company Limited, EFCC and then Minister of Petroleum under the late Gen. Sani Abacha’s regime, Chief Dan Etete.

The OPL 245, according to documents filed in court by the EFCC, was originally issued by the Federal Government to Malabu Oil and Gas Limited under shady circumstances before subsequent chain of transfers that saw the OPL handed to a consortium floated by Shell and Agip via transactions which the EFCC described as fraudulent.

March 17, 2017
‘It’s unlawful for judges to engage in business while in service’

…Prosecution tenders N4.3m cash as exhibit in court

The Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, Ahmed Saleh testified as the second prosecution witness Thursday in the on-going trial of Justice Sylvester Ngwuta.

Justice Ngwuta of the Supreme Court is being tried before the Federal High Court, Abuja by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation.

The judge, in whose houses in Abuja and Abakaliki, the Department of State Service (DSS) claimed to have recovered huge sum of money, is being tried on sundry charges including money laundering.

Thursday, Saleh, who led in evidence by the lead prosecution lawyer, Mrs. Olufemi Fatunde, said the law bars serving judicial officers to engage in business.

Saleh’s position was in response to a question whether Justices of the Supreme Court were allowed to do business while still in service.

Saleh said, “I know under the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers, judicial officers are not allowed to engage directly in businesses.”

The office of the AGF had earlier last month withdrew a N2billion criminal charge filed at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) against Saleh and two official the Supreme Court, claiming it did so they have Saleh testify for the prosecution in Justice Ngwuta’s trial.

The former prosecuting lawyer in Justice Ngwuta’s trial, Charles Adeogu-Phillips, who was also leading the prosecution team in the Saleh case, before its sudden withdrawal, frowned at the AGF’s decision.

Adeogun-Phillips later cited the withdrawal of the case against Saleh as part of his reason for withdrawing from Justice Ngwuta’s trial.

Saleh further said Thursday, that said Justice Ngwuta was appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court around June or July 2011.

He said between when Justice Ngwuta was appointed in 2011 and September 2016, a period of five years, he earned a total of £50,000, $196,000, N119m.

the incomes accruable to Justices of the Supreme Court comprised their salaries and allowances as well as air fare and estacodes paid to them when they travel abroad.

He said Justices of the apex court were also earn £10,000 for medical check-up annually, and were entitled to estacode of $1,300 per night whenever they were on a foreign trip.

Saleh said Justice Ngwuta, as a Justice of the Supreme Court, was earning N751,087 as monthly salary and N710,000 as other allowances monthly.

H added that within the last five years, Justice Ngwuta earned about £50,000 as medical allowances, $196,000 as medical allowances, N8m for air tickets for medical trips; another N8m as air fares for conferences abroad and N103m as salaries.

The witness said: “His Lordship has travelled five times from 2011 till September 2016 for medical check-up. And each year he has received £10,000 making a total of £50,000 for five years.

“His lordship was also paid a little above N8m for air tickets for the medical trips. For the various conferences that he attended over the period. His lordship was also paid a little above N8m for air tickets.

“The total estacodes paid to him for various foreign trips is $196,000.The total salaries nd allowances his lordship collected during the period is a little over N103m,” Saleh said.

Answering questions from the defence, under cross-examination, Saleh said no law barred a Justice of the Supreme Court from owning properties.

The witness said since he had been in office, he had never received any report of corruption allegation against Ngwuta.

He added: “No, in the course of my duty, I did not receive any report that the defendant engaged in business other than his work as a Justice,” the witness said.

Mrs. Fatunde, before calling Saleh to the witness stand, tendered through the first prosecution witness, Nwamba Chukwuebuka, N4, 365,840 cash, which was said to have been recovered from Justice Ngwuta’s house in Abakaliki.

The N4, 365,840 cash wrapped in a cellophane and loaded in a brown bag. The bag and another ash-coloured one, containing documents, were also admitted as exhibits.

The judge ordered that the bags with the money should be kept by the DSS for safekeeping.

Mrs. Fatunde also tendered the statements made to the DSS by the witness. The witnesses statements dated, November 12 and November 13 and 17, 2016, were admitted as exhibits without objection.

Chukwuebuka, a building contractor allegedly engaged by Justice Ngwuta to build some houses in Abakaliki, had earlier while testifying, spoken about three bags containing N27m, but that substantial part of the money was expended on the building projects before the bags were discovered by the operatives of the DSS.

The witness said what was left of the money was counted by DSS operatives in his presence at Abakaliki home of Justice Ngwuta and it was N4,365,840.

Lead defence lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN) was allowed to further cross-examine Chukwuebuka, Who confirmed that the bags and their contents belonged to Justice Nfwuta.

He said no other person has claimed ownership of the bags since they were handed to him.

Earlier at resumption of proceedings, the prosecution had the defendants re-arraigned on an amended charge of 12-count, in t place of the previous charge of 16 counts.

The trial continues Friday.‎

March 16, 2017
Justice Ademola, others seek dismissal of charges against them

…Fault prosecution’s case

Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, his wife, Olabowale and a senior Advocate of Nigeria, Joe Agi have faulted the case of the prosecution in their trial and asked a High Court of the Federal Capital territory (FCT) to dismiss the charge brought against them by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation.

Arguing their no-case submission Wednesday, the three, who are being tried on an 18-count charge in which they are accused of among others, of accepting gratification and illegal possession of firearms, argued that the prosecution was unable to establish a prima facie case against them

The prosecution, led by Segun Jegede, closed its case on February 21 this year after calling16 witnesses and tendering some documents as exhibits. Rather than conduct their defence, the defendants chose to make a no-case submission.

Adopting his client’s no-case submission Wednesday, Justice Ademola’s lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) said: “We urge my lord to respectfully hold that the prosecution did not establish prima facie case to warrant the first defendant (Justice Ademola) to enter his defence.”

He noted that the testimony of the prosecution’s main witness – an operative of the Department of State Service (DSS), Babatunde Adepoju – who investigated the case, revealed that the N30m paid by Agi into Justice Ademola’s wife’s account could not have been meant for gratification to induce the judge.

Ikpeazu said by the provision of Section 17(1)(b) of the Corrupt Practices and other related offences Act, under which the defendants were charged for the offence of gratification, the prosecution was required to prove that the N30m and the car, were not just “gifts or considerations,” but that they constituted “an inducement or reward” for a particular act of the judge.

He added: “As far as this case is concerned, the prosecution has not made out a case that the N30m was received in order to influence the first defendant. There is no link. As far as there is no link, there is no reason why the first defendant should proceed to enter his defence.”

Ikpeazu said the same principle applied to the N8.5m car which Agi was said to have bought for the judge’s son.

He argued that the charges relating to illegal possession of firearms could not stand in the light of the licences for the two guns, which were recovered from Justice Ademola’s house during the DSS raid, having been tendered.

Ikpeazu said since the testimony of PW16 indicating that the two licences covering years 2016 to 2018 were “current” and the failure of the prosecution to call Justice Mohammed as a witness, there was no further explanation left to be made by Justice Ademola and so he (Justice Ademola) could not be held liable for being in illegal possession of firearms

Lawyer to the judge’s wife, Robert Clarke (SAN) argued that the prosecution failed to produce any evidence before the court to prove that the N30 million was given to Mrs. Ademola to influence Justice Ademola’s judicial functions.

“No iota of evidence was brought before your lordship to show that the money was meant for inducement. The investigative officer (PW16) said he never investigated the second defendant. He said what drew his attention was the money transferred by the third defendant (Agi) to the second defendant (Olubowale).

“As far as that Count 2 is concerned, nothing has been brought before your lordship to warrant us to give an answer. In her statement, she said she used the money to pay for the event of her daughter’s wedding.

“They (the prosecution) have not laid any evidence of fraud or corruption to warrant us to answer. She (Olubowale) said in her statement that she had never transferred any money to the first defendant,” Clarke said.

Agi’s lawyer, Jeph Njikonye argued that the counts against his client were incompetent.

He said, “There are two essential ingredients for there to be a valid charge (of gratification) under section 17(1)(b) of the Corrupt Practices and other related offences Act. The first element is that the person charged agrees to give or offers to give a gift – that is a mandatory element.

“The second element is that such gift must be a reward for doing or fore-bearing to do something. For there to be a valid charge, these essential elements must be present in a charge,” he said.

Jegede Jegede argued that the Supreme Court has held that a prima facie case must be distinguished from prove of guilt.

He said all that is needed at this stage of the trial is for a link to be established between the evidence led and the charge filed against the defendants.

Jegede said Agi, in his extra-judicial statement, showed that he told Justice Ademola about the N30 million and was instructed to pay the money into Mrs. Ademola’s account. He said that was the link necessary for a prima facie case to be established.

The prosecution lawyer said even though there was no evidence to show that Mrs. Ademola transferred the money to Justice Ademola, the money was jointly used for their daughter’s wedding.

He added that Agi was entitled to 20% ($620 million) of the $3.2 billion garnishee order given by Justice Ademola around the period he paid the N30 million into the account of Mrs. Ademola.

Jegede said: “There are lots of issues and questions the defendants have to answer making the no-case submissions to be such that should not be granted.”

The prosecution lawyer said the expired firearms license found in the judge’s house was still in the custody of the DSS, and could not have been a renewed copy, but an entirely new one that was tendered through PW16.

Jegede argued that to prove the offence of illegal possession of firearm, the prosecution only had to show that the accused was found in possession of the firearm and that the accused has no valid license to possess the firearm. He urged the court to dismiss the no-case submissions.

Justice Jude Okeke adjourned to April 5 for ruling.

March 15, 2017