The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Judge

  • Forgery: Judge orders substituted service of charge on Saraki, others

    Forgery: Judge orders substituted service of charge on Saraki, others

    •Fixes June 27 for arraignment

    Justice Yusuf Haliru of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Jabi, Abuja has ordered substituted service, of summons in respect of the charge filed against Senate President, Bukola Saraki and three others, on them.

    The judge ordered the court’s bailiff to serve the charge and summons on the defendants by pasting in on the notice board of the National Assembly.

    Justice Haliru fixed June 27 for the formal arraignment of the defendants, which include Saraki, Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, former Clerk of the Senate, Salihu Abubakar Maikasuwa and Deputy Clerk of the Senate, Beneict Efeturi.

    Saraki and others are charged with criminal conspiracy and forgery in relation to alleged unlawful altering of the 2011 Senate Standing Order, with which the 2015 election of principal officers of the Senate was conducted.

    The order for substituted service was informed by compliant by state’s lawyer, David Kaswe, to the effect that efforts to effect personal service of the charge on the defendants,  as required by law, has been unsuccessful.

    When the case was called, Kaswe noted that the defendants were absent. He said bailiffs of the court have complained about their difficulty in effecting service on the defendants.

    “They attempted to serve them on Friday, it was not possible. They (the defendants) were not in their place of business. Attempt was made, again on Monday and it was not also successful.

    “Two affidavits have been deposed to by the bailiffs of this court to the effect that efforts have been made to serve the defendants,” Kaswe said.

    Upon an oral application for substituted, made later by Kaswe,who relieed on the provisions of sections 123(a) and 124 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, Justice Haliru said service was a constitutional right of a defendant in a criminal case.

    He said service is to ensure that such defendants is aware that a charge is pending against him in court, and to which he is required to answer.

    The judge said: “Where service is not effected on the accused persons charged with a particular offence, nothing can be done, realising the fact that it is the constitutional right of such an accused person to equally ventilate his grievances.

    “Consequently, after hearing learned counsel, Mr. Kaswe, who made an oral application based on provision of Section 123 of the ACJA 2015, which ordinarily would have been made ex-parte, whereby processes would have been filed, and realisiing that no other person would have had the opportunity of saying anything, the application shall be allowed to fly, bearing in mind simplicita, the importance of such application, which is to ensure the named defendants herein in the charge before this court are put on notice appropriately.

    “Accordingly, the application is hereby granted. Consequently, the defendants are to be served by affixing the said charge on the notice board of the National Assembly at the National Assembly Complex, Three Arms Zone, Abuja. I find solace for this under section 123 of ACJA, 2015.”

    The statement of offence in relation to count one of the charge marked: CR/219/2016 reads: “Criminal conspiracy, contrary to Section 97 of the Penal Code Law.”

    The particulars of offence in relation to the count reads: “That you Salihu Abubakar Maikasuwa, Benidict Efeturi, Dr.  Olubukola Saraki and Ike Ekweremadu on or about the 9th day of June 2015 at the National Assembly Complex, Three Arm Zone, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this court, conspired among yourselves to forge the Senate Standing Order 2011(as amended) and you thereby committed an offence of conspiracy, punishable under Section 97(1) of the Penal Code Law.”

    The statement of offence in relation to count two is “Forgery, contrary to Section 362 of the Penal Code Law.”

    The particulars of offence in relation to this count reads: “That you Salihu Abubakar Maikasuwa, Benidict Efeturi, Dr.  Olubukola Saraki and Ike Ekweremadu on or about the 9th day of June,  2015 at the National Assembly Complex, Three Arm Zone, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, with fraudulent intent, forged the Senate Standing  Order 2011 (as amended), causing it to be believed as genuine Standing Order 2015  and circulated same for use  during the inauguration of  the 8th Senate of the National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, when you knew that the said Order was not made in compliance with the procedure for the amendment of Senate Order, you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 364 of the Penal Code Law.”

  • Judge quits Suswam’s trial over media report

    Judge quits Suswam’s trial over media report

    The judge handling the trial of former Benue State Governor Gabriel Suswam and the state’s ex-Finance Commissioner, Okpanachi Oklobia, Justice Ahmed Mohammed yesterday withdrew from the case.

    Justice Mohammed withdrew from the case, citing a publication in an online media – Sahara Reporters, which he said cast him in bad light.

    Suswam and Oklobia are being tried before Justice Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Abuja for allegedly diverting about N3.111billion, proceeding of the sales of Benue State’s shares in some companies.

    At the last hearing date in the case, prosecution lawyer Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) expressed concern that one of his witnesses had been tampered with.

    Jacobs was concerned about the sudden change of testimony by a prosecution witness, Abubakar Umar, who contradicted his earlier statement to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Upon request by Jacobs for time to enable him put his house in order, Justice Mohammed adjourned to June 6.

    When parties got to court yesterday, Justice Mohammed drew their attention to the publication on Sahara Reporters and sought the reaction of lawyers in the case.

    Jacobs and defence lawyers, including Joseph Daudu (SAN), urged the judge not to be bothered by a publication by an online media without a fixed address in the country.

    They urged the judge to proceed with the case as his withdrawal would not be in the interest of parties since proceedings had gone far, with the prosecution calling four witnesses.

    In a ruling, Justice Mohammed said although he would have ignored the publication, because it was becoming a trend for people to malign judges in the media, it would be wrong for him to continue with the case when his integrity had been questioned.

    He said should he continue with the case in spite of the publication, the reasonable man on the street would say the report was true, if at the end of the day Suswam was acquitted. He added that the same reasonable man would say he had been intimidated by the report if the defendant was acquitted.

    “It is true that the publication ought not to be taken seriously because it is the trend these days to accuse a judge handling a matter of all sorts of wrongdoings. It has happened to eminent Justices of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme. But the personality of Justice Ahmed Mohammed at this level is inconsequential,” the judge said.

    He said though he agreed that substantial progress had been made in the case, “it is still the case of the prosecution that is being done”.

    “The allegation has affected the integrity of the Federal High Court. The honest view is that it is better for me to remit this case to the Chief Judge and allow the case to be re-assigned to another judge of the Federal High Court,” Justice Mohammed said.

    With the judge’s decision, the case will have to start afresh before a new judge.

     

  • Judge stops witness from testifying in Synagogue’s case

    Judge stops witness from testifying in Synagogue’s case

    AN Ikeja High Court yesterday stopped a witness from testifying in the trial of Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN) trustees and two others.

    The trustees and two engineers – Oladele Ogundeji and Akinbela Fatiregun are being tried for the church’s collapsed six-storey guest house in which 116 died.

    They are being tried on a 111-count charge of criminal negligence, manslaughter and failure to obtain building permit.

    Justice Lateef Lawal-Akapo stopped Adebayo Musiliu Olayinka from mounting the box as the first prosecution witness (PW1) following the objection of the trustees’ counsel, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN).

    Lagos State Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) Mrs. Idowu Alakija had told the court that Olayinka, one of her eight witnesses, was around to testify.

    Objecting, Fagbemi said the witness’ statement was not sent to the defence as stipulated by law.

    According to him, in criminal proceeding, the standard practice is for the prosecution to serve the defence with the list of witnesses and their statements.

    He said among the eight PWs, only the statements of three were frontloaded and served on the defence.

    The SAN said the essence of frontloading witness statements is to allow the defence to prepare well for cross-examination.

    “Allowing the witness to testify without a witness statement would amount to an ambush against the defence”, he said, urging the court to dismiss the witness until his statement is served on the defence.

    Mrs Titi Akinlawon (SAN) for Ogundeji and Chief E.L Akpofure (SAN) for Fatiregun aligned with Fagbemi’s submission.

    Responding, Mrs. Alakija insisted that the non-filing of the witness statement cannot preclude the witness from testifying.

    Ruling, Justice Lawal-Akapo upheld the defendant’s arguments and ordered that the witnesses’ statements be filed and served on them.

    He adjourned the matter till June 1.

  • Fed Govt condemns attack on judge in Dasuki’s trial

    Fed Govt condemns attack on judge in Dasuki’s trial

    The Federal Government has condemned the attack on Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    He is the trial judge in the case against former National Security Adviser (NSA) Mohammed Sambo Dasuki.

    Dasuki’s lead-lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN) had on May 19, written the judge, querying his decision to direct the commencement of trial in the case and sought a postponement of further proceedings pending when he would be available in court.

    Reacting to the letter, lawyer to the Federal Government and lead prosecution counsel, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN), condemned the content of the letter and distanced his team form the decision of the defence to write, querying the judge’s decision rather than file an appeal against a ruling of the court they were not happy with.

    “We dissociate ourselves from the content of the letter, particularly paragraphs three and four, which we believe, are not complementary and ought not to have been written.

    “We are willing to concede to their request for adjournment, although we do not think it was necessary since the team is led by a Senior Advocate, in the person of Ahmed Raji,” Okpeseyi said last Thursday during proceedings the trial of Dasuki for unlawful possession of arms and ammunition as well as money laundering.

    Justice Ademola had, on May 18, refused the oral application by Raji, for stay of proceedings in the case pending the determination of the motion for stay of proceedings filed by the defence before the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

    The judge, in refusing Raji’s application, noted that the motion was not before his court, and relied on the provision of Section 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 and the Court of Appeal ‘s recent  decision not to entertain motion for stay of proceedings in some appeals  including those by Senate President, Bukola Saraki, Biafra agitator and  Nnamdi Kanu.

    Although proceedings continued after the judge’s ruling on May 18, the judge was bitter about the content of the letter written the next day by Daudu, querying among others, Justice Ademola’s decision to reject Raji’s application for stay of proceedings.

    Justice Ademola , who vowed to bring the letter to the attention of the court’s Chief Judge, said the content of the letter “is highly objectionable.”

    While Daudu, in paragraph three of the letter, queried the judge’s exercise of his discretion to refuse Raji’s application for stay of proceeding, he, in paragraph four, accused court of pressurizing the defence to subject itself to trial.

    Paragraph for of the letter signed by The Nation on Friday, reads: “My lord, right or access to courts in Nigeria is reserved by Section 6 of the Constitution to all persons including government; none has a greater stake in justice than the other.

    “A situation whereby it would appear to a reasonable man or a judge in the Clapham Omnibus that one part has a superior stake in the justice of a case and that the other party is merely desirous of delaying proceedings must be corrected at the earliest opportunity.

    “After all, the prosecutions in this case are the ones that have flouted three positive orders of this honourable court and it is startling that the court is now putting pressure on the party that is incarcerated unlawfully by the state and giving access to the disobedient party.

    “My lord, we are within our right to approach the Court of Appeal to hear the pending application before it and nothing must be done to stultify our right to approach any court in Nigeria.”

    Further hearing in the case has been fixed for June 8.

  • NBA seeks reversal of judge’s retirement

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Ikorodu Branch has appealed to Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode to reinstate Justice Oluyinka Gbajabiamila

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) sent the judge on compulsory retirement for alleged falsification of age, but the NBA is seeking a reversal.

    The appeal was contained in an April 21  letter  addressed to the governor and titled: ”re: Compulsory retirement of Honourable Justice  Gbajabiamila: Letter of appeal for your Excellency’s intervention”. It was signed by the Branch Chairman and Secretary, Dotun Adetunji and Blessing Eneh.

    The letter stated in part: “On behalf of the Executive and all members of the above-named Branch of the NBA, we hereby appeal passionately for your Excellency’s intervention on the decision of the National Judicial Council on compulsory retirement of Honourable Justice Oluyinka Gbajabiamila on Tuesday, the 19th of April, 2016.

    “Honourable Justice Oluyinka Gbajabiamila an incorruptible, honest, thorough, upright and God-fearing Judge who is one of the best Judges in Lagos State as his judgments are per merit, does not deserve the decision of the National Judicial Council.

    “Moreover your Excellency Sir, Justice Oluyinka Gbajabiamila is a man of integrity that lawyers and even litigants vouch for. We cannot but have Honourable Justice Oluyinka Gbajabiamila back on the bench. We plead passionately.

    “We pray your Excellency for your quick intervention to ensure that the decision is reversed.

    “Thanking your Excellency in anticipated swift action,” it stated.

  • Judge cautions lawyer for improper dressing

    Justice Peter Lifu of the National Industrial Court, Abuja, on Wednesday cautioned a lawyer who appeared in court dressed improperly.

    The lawyer, Mr Bala Ali, a legal officer with the Management Board, University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital, appeared in court not properly robed and casually dressed.

    He wore only a pair of trousers and a shirt without a tie and without tucking in his shirt.

    The judge noticed the improper dressing in court when he announced his appearance as legal officer, representing the hospital and also as a witness in an existing suit in court.

    One Malam Mahmood Sambo, Assistant Director and Head of Finance Department of the hospital, had instituted a suit against the hospital, alleging wrongful dismissal over alleged petitions of fraud.

    Ali, being the hospital’s legal officer, had appeared in court to represent the hospital as a defence witness in the suit.

    The legal officer, while being cautioned by the judge, argued that as a defence witness for the hospital, he did not see it fit to dress formally.
    He, however, apologised to the court for dressing improperly to court.

    Other lawyers also pleaded on his behalf to be allowed to remain in court as a defence witness in the suit.

    Lifu, thereafter, stressed the need for all legal practitioners to dress decently and in accordance to their profession, especially when in court, irrespective of the duty they were assigned to perform.

    He noted that the court is a hallowed chamber and as ‘ministers in the temple of justice’, lawyers ought to comport themselves in line with their roles.

  • Cynthia: Judge warns defendants against delay tactics 

    Cynthia: Judge warns defendants against delay tactics 

    Justice Olabisi Akinlade of a Lagos State High Court sitting in Igbosere Monday warned the four men standing trial for the alleged murder of Cynthia Osukogu, a postgraduate student of Nasarawa State University, against attempting to delay the case.

    The trial which began in 2012, was scheduled for adoption of final written addresses yesterday, but suffered another setback when the defendants’ counsel sought for more time to file the addresses.

    The trial has suffered a series of adjournments due to delays by the defendants’ counsel in filing their written addresses since 2015.

    Justice Akinlade, who did not hide her displeasure over the delay Monday, warned the defence to stop giving flimsy excuses to delay the trial.

    During hearing in August 2015, the judge threatened to send the fourth defendant, Nonso Ezike, back to prison for deliberately stalling trial.

    Osukogu was allegedly murdered by friends she met on social media website, Facebook, on July 22, 2012, at Cosmilla Hotel, Lake View Estate, Festac Town in Lagos.

    The defendants, Okwumo Nwabufor, Olisaeloka Ezike, Orji Osita and Nonso Ejike, are standing trial on a two-count charge of conspiracy and murder.

    The case was adjourned till June 8, for the adoption of written addresses.

  • Judge strikes out dead witness’ name in case

    Justice A. A. Babawale of the Sagamu High Court in Ogun State has struck out the  name  of the late Prince Obafemi Awoyade in the suit filed by Prince Adetayo Odunsi challenging the nomination of Albert Mayungbe as the Odemo of Isara-Remo.

    Justice Babawale struck out the late Awoyade’s name, who was the second defence witness, following an application by the defence counsel, Mr. A. O. Odusanya seeking to substitute him.

    Odusanya, representing the first to 13th defendants, had at the resumed pre-trial conference of the parties, reminded the court of their pending application to substitute the deceased who until his death early this year,  was the Head of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling House of Isara-Remo.

    Earlier, the claimant’s counsel,  Olumuyiwa Obanewa said out of the 11 documents filed by the defence, he found five to be contentious, stressing that about three of the documents were not written in the language of the court.

    Responding to the enquiry of the court, Odusanya explained that the defence would make use of an interpreter in respect of the documents.

    He said the defence found three of about 12 documents filed by the claimant contentious.

    Justice Babawale told the parties that the court had taken note of the contentious documents in its record and adjoined the matter to May 5 and 12, 2016 for definite hearing.

    Co-defendants in the suit are the late head of the ruling house, Prince Obafemi Awoyade now substituted by another; Secretary, Remo North Local Government;  Oliwo of Isara, Chief Ajibowu Ogunfowodu; Apena of Isara, Chief Jimoh Soyombo; Chief Ladipo Ogunyemi; Ogbeni Odi of Isara, Chief Olajubu Osibote; Ekeji Asipa Odi, Chief Tunde Kalejaiye; Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief Owuye Logba.

    Others are Ekeji Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief Efuwape Sotikare; Olori Emo of Isara, Chief Bashiru Awoniyi; Ekeji Olori Emo of Isara, Chief Korede Ogunwole; Asipa Emo of Isara, Chief Nosiru Sodipe; Ekeji Asipa Emo, Chief Adewole Sopitan; Governor of Ogun State; Executive Council of Ogun State; the State Commissioner for Chieftaincy and Local Government and the state Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice as second to 18thdefendants.

    Prince Odunsi , who claimed to be a direct descendant of the late Oba Oyemade Mayungbe and progenitor of Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House, averred that he is the one lawfully entitled to the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.

    Odunsi sought seven prayers and orders against the defendants: “a declaration that the first defendant is not a member of the Erinsiba-Adyoledoye Ruling House and therefore not qualified to contest for the stool; that under native law and custom applicable in Isara and Remoland generally, an Odi (servant of the king) or  any of his descendants is not qualified to contest for the stool of Odemo of Isara; that the first defendant’s late grandfather and father, late Ogunsakin and Oyekunle Mayungbe were Odi  to the late Oba Samuel Akinsanya and late Oba Adeboboye Osideinde  and therefore not qualified to aspire or to be considered for nomination to the stool.

    He, therefore, sought an order of the court setting aside the nomination exercise of Erinsiba/Ayoledoye ruling house held on February 21, 2011 at which meeting the first defendant emerged as one of the candidates for the Odemo of Isara chieftaincy; an order setting aside the decision of the kingmakers selecting or electing the first defendant as the candidate for the Odemo of Isara chieftaincy among other prayers.

    In their statement of defence and counter claim, the first, second, sixth to tenth and 14th defendants admitted some of the averments of the claimant and deny others.

    The first defendant, Albert Mayungbe, insisted on being a “bonafide member  and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling House and that the late Oba Mayungbe, aside from being a trader, met and married Arobo in Akure where Ogunsakin, his grandfather, was born.

    They  prayed the court for an order of mandamus compelling the 15th and 16thdefendants to give approval to the appointment of the first defendant as the new Odemo-elect of Isara-Remo.

    But the claimant, in his reply to the statement of defence and counter claim of the first, second, sixth to tenth and 14thdefendants, had contended that the first defendant is not a bonafide member and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling house.

  • I have no relationship with Metuh, says judge

    I have no relationship with Metuh, says judge

    The judge handling the trial of the spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh has said he had neither social nor work relationship with the politician.

    Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja said he did not know Metuh during his (the judge) practice as a lawyer and while in school.

    The judge’s position  is contained in his response to a petition written against him by Metuh to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta. Justice Abang’s response is dated March 23.

    Metuh had, in the petition written against by one of lawyers, Emeka Etiaba (SAN), claimed among others, that the judge was his classmate at the Law School in 1988 and that he last met the judge late last year at the Meridien Hotel, Akwa Ibom.

    Metuh, who said he was worried he could not get justice before the judge, accused him (Justice Abang) of bias and of deliberately refusing to release records of proceedings to enable him appeal the judge’s earlier decisions.

    The PDP spokesman, whose move is seen as attempt to scuttle his trial, is praying Justice Auta to transfer the case to another judge to commence afresh.

    Metuh and his company, Destra Investment Limited were arraigned before Justice Abang in January on a seven-count charge, in which they were accused of retaining proceeds of unlawful act and engaging in money laundering.

    The prosecution closed its in February after calling eight witness. But, rather than open their defence, Metuh and his firm made a no-case submission.

    In  a ruling on March 9 Justice Abnag rejected the no-case submission, on the ground that the prosecution has established a case against Metuh and his company, requiring them being called upon to enter defence.

    Rather the open his defence,Metuh, on March 11 petitioned the court’s Chief Judge, raising sundry accusations against Justice Abang and requested the transfer of the case against him to another judge.

    Lead prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir said he was not served a copy of Metuh’s petition as required.

    Justice Abang, in his response to Metuh’s petition, a copy of which The Nation sighted in Abuja, although he neither knew nor had any relationship with Metuh, it was impossible for the relationship Metuh claimed existed between them to affect the facts and laws in relation to his (Metuh’s) trial.

    “With respect to the first issue that the petitioner Emeka Etiaba (SAN) stated that the 1st defendant in Charge FHC/ABJ/CR/05/2016 was my classmate in the Nigerian Law School,my Lord, for the records, I was at the Law School in 1987/88 Academic Session.

    “I am not aware that Olisa Metuh was my classmate in the Nigerian Law School.  I cannot recall seeing him in the time session in my time. In the law school, we were over 1,000 students and we had then two sessions, morning that I attended.

    “He is not from my place, Oron, in Akwa Ibom State. I did not see him as a student  in University of Calabar that I attended between  September 1983 till June 1987.

    “I have never met him in practice anywhere  in the country before I was elevated to the bench in June 2009. Again, he claimed he met me in Le’ Mariden Uyo late last year.

    “I was not  in  Le’ Meriden Uyo late last year .  I had no function that I attended in Le’ Meriden Uyo late last year. I did not meet him in Le’ Meriden Uyo late last year.

    “If the records show  that he is a lawyer and was called to Nigerian Bar on November 3, 1988, which record I am yet to see, that cannot affect the facts and the law.

    “I attended recently my class reunion meeting in Abuja, Lagos and Enugu, I did not see Olisa Metuh in the places I mentioned.  I am not related to Olisa Metuh in any way, I do not know where he comes from,” Justice Abang said.

    On Metuh’s allegation that majority of the judge’s rulings was in favour of the prosecution, Justice Abang noted that as a lawyer, Etiaba knew what option exists for a party, who is not comfortable with a court’s decision.

    “As regard the issue that I made interlocutory decisions in favour of the prosecution in the matter, my response here is simple. And that is, that  I am entitled to give decisions in matters placed before me for adjudication having heard parties.

    “That is why there are appellate courts. If he is dissatisfied with those decisions, I think Emeka Etiaba (SAN) ought to know  what to do.

    “As regard the alleged non-release of the record of proceedings,  I think Emeka Etiaba (SAN) is not fair to me at all. I will leave him to his conscience. He has an improper motive in this regard.

    “For the records, my lord, the defendant applied for the Certified True Copy of proceedings at the time proceedings were going on from day to day. I approved same and directed my secretary to type the proceedings.

    “The proceedings were bulky in nature because I heard the case from day to day. When the secretary concluded typing the proceedings, I abandoned all other matters before me and concentrated  on checking  the typed proceedings  to be in line with what were in the court’s records.

    “When I proof-read the proceedings and was satisfied that it represents  what transpired in the open court, I endorsed same for certification and released the proceedings to them on March 15, 2016,” Justice Abang said.

    When parties were last in court on March 24, Justice Abang noted that Metuh, in addition to his petition, has applied to the judge to disqualify himself from further trying the case, raining similar issues as contained in the petition.

    The PDP spokesman has also applied to the court for an indefinite stay of proceedings pending the determination of his appeal.

    On March 24, Justice Abang adjourned to April 8 for hearing of the both applications by Metuh.

    The judge said the outcome of his rulings on the applications would determine the future of the case.

    ?” If the application for stay of proceedings fails, the defendant will  be at liberty to open is defence for the last time,” the judge said.

  • Judge decries Oronsaye’s counsel absence

    Judge decries Oronsaye’s counsel absence

    An FCT High Court on Thursday decried the absence of the counsel to Steve Oronsaye, a former Head of Service of the Federation.

    Oronsaye was arraigned on a two-count of criminal breach of trust and was granted bail at the last hearing.

    He alleged deposited N190 million meant for the Presidential Committee on Financial Action Task Force, which he chaired into a fixed bond in different banks.

    The judge, Justice Olasumbo Goodluck said that when matters were fixed based on the consent of all counsel it should be kept.

    She expressed worries that out of the three senior advocates handling this case, not even one appeared.

    “This suit was fixed by consent and participation of all counsel for the hearing of this matter today. This court frowns at the absence of the lead senior advocate in this suit.

    “The adjournment will be reluctantly granted in the expectation that the defence team will accord this suit the seriousness it deserved.

    “In other words, an adjournment of this kind will not be entertained nor allowed in the future,’’ she held.

    She, therefore, adjourned the case till April 13 for hearing.

    Earlier, Mr. Barth Ogar, hold the brief of the lead counsel to Oronsaye, applied for adjournment.

    Ogar said that the lead counsel could not appear because he was joining Chief Kanu Agabi to appear in another case at Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    Prosecuting Counsel Offem Uket opposed the application, and submitted that other senior advocates in the suit should have appeared.