The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Justice Adeniyi Ademola

  • Ohakim: Court fixes June 30 to rule on no case submission

    Ohakim: Court fixes June 30 to rule on no case submission

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, has fixed June 30 for ruling on the application for a no-case-submission filed by the former governor of Imo, Ikedi Ohakim.

    Ohakim was to open his defence on Monday, on a three- count charge of money laundering he allegedly committed while serving as governor between 2007 and 2011.

    The charges hinged on the property he acquired but failed to declare in his assets declaration form.

    At the resumed hearing counsel to the defendant, Mr Awa Kalu (SAN), told the court that he had no case to answer and as such he had filed a no-case-submission.

    Kalu also told the court of Ohakim’s willingness to withdraw the initial confessional statement he made as regards ownership of the property he acquired.

    “When he was arrested, he was drilled for eight hours, these are some of the things that led to the alleged confession.

    “There is nothing to show that his house where his documents were kept was not burnt and his documents were not destroyed.

    “It will be injurious to ask the defendant to enter the witness box to explain the transaction that has no witnesses.”

    The counsel, therefore, prayed the court to ask the defendant to go home as he had no case to answer.

    The prosecution counsel, Festus Keyamo, however, objected to the plea saying he had filed an application to that effect.

    “On the issue of withdrawing the statements, those statements were made under caution. It cuts the grass under the feet off the defendant.

    “If he was not free to make the statement, he would have said so, but he signed the statement that he made it free and without compulsion.”

    Kayamo added that Ohakim made efforts to conceal the origin of the property acquired by money laundering, by not being not straightforward in his statements.

    “A man cannot forget how he acquired his house. I ask the court to take judicial notice of the fact that a man does not forget how he acquires his house. It shows effort to conceal the origin of the house.

    “We want the court to invite the accused person to explain how he acquired the house. He should be made to enter his defence.”

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola reserved June 30 for ruling.

  • Judge to report Dasuki lawyer’s ‘disparaging comment’ to CJ

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Thursday vowed to report to the court’s Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, the disparaging comments made about him by Joseph Daudu (SAN), lawyer to ex-National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki.

    Dasuki was arraigned at the court last year on charges of illegal arms possession and money laundering.

    Despite efforts by his lawyers to prevent the commencement of trial, the court allowed the prosecution to open its case on Wednesday, and the later called its first witness.

    Although Dasuki’s legal team, led by Ahmed Raji (SAN), was in court and crossed examined the first prosecution witness, Samuel Ogbu, for two days, another member of the ex-NSA legal team, Daudu wrote the judge on Thursday, accusing him of compelling the defence to face trail.

    Daudu, in the letter, reportedly accused the judge of putting pressure on the defendant to face trial when the prosecution was in breach of the court’s order.

     

     

     

     

  • Judge’s absence stalls ruling on legality of Dasuki’s detention

    Judge’s absence stalls ruling on legality of Dasuki’s detention

    The Absence of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja stalled the ruling scheduled fro yesterday on whether or not the continued detention of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki was legal.
    Dasuki, who is on trial before the court on charges of money laundering and illegal possession of firearms, had challenged his continued detention and urged the court to either quash the charge against him or halt proceedings indefinitely until he was released from detention.
    The ex-NSA, in a motion argued by his lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN), accused the prosecution of violating an earlier of the court, admitting him to bail. He urged the court not to further indulge the prosecution by allowing it to continue with proceedings in the case.
    Justice Ademola was expected to rule yesterday on whether or not Dasuki’s continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) was a violation of his earlier orders granting him bail and permitting him to travel abroad for medical reasons.
    When parties got to court yesterday, they were informed by court officials that the judge was not available.
    It was learnt that the judge’s absence was in relation to the court’s Easter vacation which was still on as at yesterday.
    No date has been fixed for the ruling as an official of the court said it was the prerogative of the judge only to determine when to schedule for judgement or ruling.
    Similar application by Dasuki had been rejected by two judges in earlier rulings.
    Justice Peter Affen of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) had, in a ruling on March 4 this year, held thaT Dasuki’s application lacked merit.
    The judge further held that the order granting bail to the defendant (Dasuki) did not preclude him from being re-arrested by other agencies of the Federal Government in respect of other alleged crime.
    “Though, both the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the DSS are agencies of the Federal Government of Nigeria, they are established under separate enactments and vested with distinct legal persona, powers and responsibilities such that one is not liable for action or inaction of the other.
    “Even criminal prosecution is undertaken by them separately in the name of the Federal Government of Nigeria merely to facilitate the due administration of justice, which does not alter the mark of separate and distinct legal identities.
    “This being so, the inevitable conclusion to reach is that the applicant has not made out a proper case of disobedience of the order made by this court on December 21, 2015 and therefore there is no legal or factual basis upon which the court can prohibit the complainant from further prosecuting the instant charges not to mention any other charge before any other court as prayed by the second defendant.
    “The point has already been made that the order allegedly disobeyed or violated did not contemplate any government agency other than the EFCC and that this court did not restrain the arrest, the re-arrest or detention of the second defendant or any of the defendants for further offences when alleged against them,” the judge said.
    Justice Affen added that there was “no correlation” between the prayer sought by Dasuki to discharge him and the alleged disobedience of court order.
    “I have found no correlation whatsoever and none has been demonstrated between the alleged disobedience of court order and being discharged of the offences charged.
    “I take the considered view that even if the second defendant/applicant has succeeded in establishing the case of disobedience of the orders granted on December 21, 2015, and I have already held that he did not do so, that would not constitute valid grounds for discharging him of the offences preferred against him,” he said.
    On February 9 this year, Justice Hussein Baba Yusuf (also of the High Court of the FCT) held, in a ruling on   a similar application by Dasuki, held that the ex-NSA was in error in his argument that his continued detention was in breach of a subsisting order of the court.
  • Court asks FG to produce Dasuki in court

    Court asks FG to produce Dasuki in court

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday asked the Federal Government to produce the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki, in court on February 16 to face criminal charges.

    Dasuki was absent in court when his trial for money laundering and illegal possession of firearms resumed on Wednesday.

    The development prompted Justice Adeniyi Ademola to order the federal government to produce the ex-NSA before the court at the next sitting.

    The judge adjourned the matter till February 16 for commencement of trial, stressing that Dasuki must be physically present in court to face criminal charges against him.

  • Court reserves judgment in suit seeking Saraki, Ekweremadu’s sack

    Court reserves judgment in suit seeking Saraki, Ekweremadu’s sack

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Monday reserved judgment in a suit filed by five serving Senators, who are seeking to void the election of Bukola Saraki and Ike Ekweremadu as Senate President and Deputy Senate President.

    The judge, after listening to lawyers to parties in the case adopt their final written addresses, announced that they would be contacted when the judgment is ready.

    The suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/651/2015 has Senators Abu Ibrahim, Kabir Marafa, Ajayi  Boroffice, Olugbenga Ashafa and Suleiman Hunkuyi as plaintiffs, with Saraki, Ekweremadu, the National Assembly, the Clerks of the National Assembly and the Clerk of the Senate as defendants.

    It is the palintiff’s contention that the election of Saraki and Ekweremadu as President and Deputy President was invalid on the ground that the Senate Standing Orders 2015 used for the election was a forged document. 

    The plaintiffs argued that since the Senate Standing Order 2011, which was the valid Senate Rules as at the proclamation of the 8th Senate on June 9, was not known to have been validly altered before the election, the 2015 Rules could not be said to be a legitimate document.

    They stated, in a supporting affidavit,  that the Senate Standing ‎Orders 2015 was “contrived” from the amendment of the 2011 version of the Orders without following its (the 2011 edition’s) relevant provisions and those of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    The plaintiffs argued that the said amendment was in breach of the “prescriptive procedures” stipulated by the extant provisions of section 60 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Rule 110(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) of the Senate Standing Orders 2011 (as amended).

    They therefore prayed the court for the following reliefs:

    • A declaration that the Senate Standing Order 2011(as amended) is the proper, valid, constitutional and subsisting Rules/Standing Orders of the 8th Senate.
    • A  declaration that the Senate Standing Order 2015(as amended), not being a product of any legitimate amendment pursuant to the extant provisions of Rule 110 of the Senate Standing Orders 2011 (as amended), is invalid, illegal, unconstitutional.
    • A declaration that the election of the 1st and 2nd defendants as the President and Deputy  President of the Senate of the 8th Senate pursuant to the Senate Standing Orders 2015 and contrary to the provisions of Rules 3(3)(e) and (k), Chapter II of the Senate Standing Orders 2011, is illegal and unconstitutional
    • An order setting aside the purported election of the 1st and 2nd defendants as Senate President and Deputy Senate President of the 8th Senate; an order setting aside the Senate Standing Orders 2015 and an order directing the 8th Senate to elect its presiding officers in accordance with the provisions of Section 54 of the Constitution and Rules 3(3)(e) and (k)of the Senate Standing Orders 2011.

    Justice Ademola, on Tuesday took arguments from parties on the substantive suit and defendants’ preliminary objection.

    Plaintiffs’ lawyer, Mamman Osuman (SAN) urged the court to disregard the defendants’ objection and grant his client’s prayers.

    The defendants, represented by Kehinde Eleja (SAN), Ikechukwu Ezechukwu (SAN) and Miss Nancy Odimegwu, faulted the competence of the suit and urged the court to dismiss the suit.

  • Court to DSS: Allow Dasuki to travel for treatment

    Court to DSS: Allow Dasuki to travel for treatment

    A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Friday, ordered the Department of State Services (DSS), to allow a former National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd), to travel abroad for medical attention.

    Dasuki is seeking the enforcement of the court’s earlier order which gave him three-week permission to seek medical treatment abroad.

    Ruling on the matter Friday, Justice A‎demola Adeniyi, insisted that the ex-NSAmust be allowed to travel without delay.

    “Court order must be obeyed. What is wrong in the defendant travelling and coming back to face trial?

    “Only a fit person can stand for trial and investigation. My own orders will not be flouted,” the judge ruled.

  • Dasuki arraigned, granted bail on self-recognition

    Dasuki arraigned, granted bail on self-recognition

    Former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki, was arraigned on Tuesday morning before a Federal High Court in Abuja.

    Dasuki was arraigned on a one-count charge bordering on illegal possession of fire arms, an offence punishable under section 27(i) (a)(i) of the Firearms Act Cap F28 LFN 2004.

    He pleaded not guilty to the charge, following which the trial judge, Justice Adeniyi Ademola, granted him bail on self recognition, upon an application filed by his lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN).

    The prosecution lawyer, M. S. Diri, did not oppose the application for bail, but left the issue at the court’s discretion.

    Justice Ademola ordered Dasuki to deposit all his international passports with the court’s Deputy Registrar, Litigation. He ordered that the passports should be retrieved, if they are currently being held by other government agencies, and handed to the named court’s official.

    Further hearing has been fixed for October 26.

  • Court faults INEC on party de-registration

    Court faults INEC on party de-registration

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court in Abuja has faulted the decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to de-register a political party, Hope Democratic Party (HDP).

    Justice Ademola, in a judgment yesterday, held that INEC lacked the power to de-register political parties without giving them fair hearing.

    He declared as “null, void, unlawful, unconstitutional and of no effect” the de-registration of HDP through a letter dated December 6, 2013 and a statement by INEC on December 8, 2012.

    The judge ordered INEC to immediately relist the party, which it de-registered in December 2012. The judgment was in a suit by HDP.

    Justice Ademola held that INEC’s failure  to give notice to the party before announcing its de-registration through a letter on December 6, 2012 (and delivered December 12) and a statement on December 8, 2012, amounted to a breach of the party’s right to fair hearing.

    He said INEC breached the party’s right to fair hearing enshrined in Section 36 of the constitution.

    The judge set aside INEC’s purported statement of December 8, 2012 and letters on December 6, 2012, suggesting and purporting the de-registration of the plaintiff.

    He granted a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from further acts, publication or pronouncements, obstructions, deregistering, delisting and or interfering with the operations and activities of the plaintiff as duly registered political parties in Nigeria as provided by the constitution.

    The judge declined to void the provision of Section 78 (7) of the Electoral Act, as prayed by the plaintiff – HDP. He upheld the provisions of Section 78(7) of the Electoral Act, 2010, which empowers INEC to de-register political parties, but said such powers must be exercised with due process.

    “The second defendant (INEC) has the power to de-register political parties with regards to Section 78(7) of the Constitution as it is not in breach of sections 1(3), 40, 222, 228 and 229, paragraph 1 of the third schedule of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

    “They can do that but they must give fair hearing to the party. This (failure to give fair hearing) was a grave error or omission by the second plaintiff,” Justice Ademola said.

    Defendants in the suit are: the National Assembly and the INEC.

    Justice Ademola struck out the name of the second plaintiff – the National Coalition for Democratic Change (NCDC) – which sued for itself and other affected de-registered political parties.

    The judge held that the NCDC, having not been registered as a political party, lacked the locus standi to institute the suit.

    “The second plaintiff is a mere association and nothing more. It is not a political party,” he said.

    Justice Ademola, who noted that INEC was yet to comply with a similar judgment given on July 29, 2013 in respect of Fresh Democratic Party, by Justice Gabriel Kolawole (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja), said it was mandatory under the law for court judgment to be enforced immediately.

    “The orders must be obeyed. No selective obedience. The orders must be complied with immediately,” the judge said.

     

     

  • Media houses’ bomber has case to answer – Court

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday held that Mustapha Umar, being tried for alleged involvement in the bombing of a building occupied by three media houses in Kaduna State has a case to answer.

    The judge, in a ruling, dismissed the no-case submission made by the accused person after the prosecution closed its case.

    Umar, had in his no-case submission, argued that the prosecution failed to make out a prima facie case against him.

    He also argued that all evidence led by the prosecution did not link him to the charges preferred against him

    His lawyer, Nureini Sulaiman prayed the court to set his client free.

    The judge upheld the prosecution’s counter argument that it has sufficient evidence establishing a prima facie case against the accused person.

    The judge called on him to open his defence.

    Umar, a suspected Boko Haram member, is charged with terrorism related offences over the explosion which partly damaged the building -SOJ Plaza.

    The building on Kontagora Road, Kaduna, is occupied by Thisday, the Sun and the Moment newspapers.

    Following the judge’s ruling, Umar testified as the only defence witness. He denied the allegations against him.

    He denied the confessional statement he made in a video evidence tendered by the prosecution.

    Umar said the video, where he admitted the charge, was doctored by his interrogators, who he accused of excluding where he was tortured and compelled to confessing to the crime.

    Justice Ademola adjourned to September 30 for parties to adopt their final written submissions.