The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Justice Nnamdi Dimgba

  • Centenary City project: Judge refuses to quash report against Anyim, others

    Centenary City project: Judge refuses to quash report against Anyim, others

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court, Abuja Monday refused to quash the damaging report issued by the House of Representatives on its investigation of the controversial Centenary City project promoted under the administration of Goodluck Jonathan.

    The report had indicted former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Anyim Pius Anyim and other major actors in the handling of the project.

    In a judgment yesterday, Justice Dimgba dismissed the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/258/2017, filed in the name of centenary City Plc,seeking among others, the voiding of the report.

    Justice Dimgba noted that the allegations of bias and bad faith raised against Herman Hembe, who head the House of Reps’ committee that investigated allegation of corruption in the project, was insufficient to move the court to quash the report.

    The plaintiff had, in the suit filed on March 29 this year, claimed among others, that Hembe had sought a private meetings with the plaintiff  prior to the investigation (public hearing) with the intention of being induced.

    It equally claimed that its representatives at the public hearing demanded Hembe’s disqualification from the committee, but that its lawyers and representatives later walked out of the proceedings when Hembe failed to step down.

    The plaintiff, which complained of being denied fair hearing, said the committee proceeded with the public hearing, without its participation, and issued a majority report, but with a member dissenting, a report the entire House of Reps later adopted.

    In his judgement, Justice Dimgba said the suit was one that was built on Section 36(1) of the Constitution, which “provisions are only applicable, in the determination of the civil rights and obligations of persons before a court or other judicial tribunal established by law”.

    The judge observed that “the majority report, adopted by the whole House made adverse findings and recommendations on the project”.

    He further observed that the plaintiff thought that the House of Reps’ perception of the project, its adverse conclusions and recommendations, contained in its report, were not accidental, but orchestrated by the second defendant (Hembe).

    The judge also noted that the plaintiff, in filing the suit, thought that Hembe had “some legacy hatred against the chief promoter of the project, former Senate President and Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator Pius Anyim”.

    Justice Dimgba said granting the plaintiff’s prayers and quashing such a report issued and ratified by another arm of government could endanger the stability of the political system in terms of the relations among independent and equal arms of government.

    The judge said it was necessary for the court “to tread very carefully here so as not to breed hostility among separate organs of government that should accord each other reciprocal respect”.

    Justice Dimgba said: “In all honesty, upon a full and dispassionate appraisal of what has been placed before me, I do not believe that a sufficient case has been made warranting the intervention of the Court in the manner prayed for in the suit.

    “First, this suit has been built on Section 36(1) of the Constitution.  A review of the said section shows that the provisions are only applicable, ‘in the determination of the civil rights and obligations’ of persons ‘before a Court or other judicial tribunal established by law.

    “I do not agree that the defendants are acting as court or tribunal or performing a quasi-judicial function. I do not even agree that the defendants are acting in administrative capacity.

    “All the conditions enumerated in Section 36 must co-exist in a given situation for the provisions to enjoy any relevance,” the judge said.

    He refused the plaintiff’s argument that the House of Reps’ report must be voided because the Senate had earlier conducted similar investigation and given Anyim and others pass mark.

    The judge added: “I state for the avoidance of any doubt, that the House of Representatives’ investigation of the Centenary City project, which the Senate has justified, might appear mischievous or driven by questionable motives or goals, as alleged, but the investigation itself is not illegal, since the Senate’s findings are not binding on the House of Representatives, being independent legislative facilities established by the Constitution.”

    The judge said the plaintiff failed to provide the court with relevant materials to prove that the House of Representatives’ committee was compromised by Hembe’s personal interest.

    Justice Dimgba said: “The evidence clearly shows that the plaintiff was invited to the public hearing, as were other relevant stakeholders.

    “The right to be heard, simply means the opportunity to be heard, not that one must be heard definitively even when you spurn the opportunity,” he said.

    He noted that, with questions of credibility surrounding the report, especially as captured by the minority report, ignored by the House of Reps, the plaintiff, rather than rushing to court, ought to have impressed it on the government agencies, to which the report was sent, not to implement it.

     

  • Court orders INEC to proceed with Dino Melaye ’s recall process

    Court orders INEC to proceed with Dino Melaye ’s recall process

    A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Monday dismissed the suit filed by the senator representing Kogi West Senatorial District, Dino Melaye, challenging the recall process initiated by his constituents.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to proceed with the process.

    The judgment effectively terminated the ex parte order made by Justice John Tsoho of the same court, on July 6, directing parties in the matter to maintain status quo.

    Justice Dimgba noted that the 90 days period within which the Constitution ordered the INEC to conduct a referendum on the matter elapsed on June 23, when Dino Melaye commenced the suit.

    He ordered that the period would only continue running from Monday.

    The judge also directed INEC to issue an amended recall timetable giving Dino Melaye a minimum of two weeks to prepare his defence against the recall process.

    INEC had set July 3 as the commencement date for the recall process  after voters in Kogi West voted for the senator’s recall.

    A total of 188, 588 signatures were submitted to INEC by a representative of the zone.

    The figure represented 52.3 per cent of the total registered voters in the district.

     

  • Oil bunkering: Court orders forfeiture of ships, trucks, others

    Oil bunkering: Court orders forfeiture of ships, trucks, others

    A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ordered the interim forfeiture of about 500 vessels, boats, barges, trucks, tankers and motorcycles seized from alleged oil thieves nationwide.

    The Federal Government had filed two ex-parte applications, seeking the forfeiture of the items and these were granted by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba on August 10 after taking arguments from applicants’ lawyer, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN).

    The applications are marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/741/2017 and FHC/ABJ/CS/742/2017

    The affected items and their consignments, according to court documents, were seized from alleged oil thieves by the Nigerian Navy and the Inspector General of Police (IGP)’s Special Task Force on Petroleum/Illegal Bunkering.

    By the ruling of the court, certified true copies of which The Nation sighted in Abuja on Monday, the owners of the affected items and the consignments have been given 14 days to show cause why the items should not be forfeited to the federal government permanently.

    Part of the ruling reads: “That order of interim forfeiture is hereby granted to the first applicant – FRN -, of all the items listed in the schedule attached to this motion, marked as Exhibits OB1 – OB3, including, but not limited to vessels, barges, boats, laden cargo pending the final determination of the originating motion on notice.

    “That order of interim forfeiture is hereby granted to the first applicant – FRN – of all the items listed in the schedule attached to this motion, marked as Exhibit BB1, including, but not limited to motor vehicles (trucks, tankers, buses, cars and cycles – tricycles and motorcycles) and the goods/products contained therein, pending the final determination of the originating motion on notice.”

    The court also granted an order allowing the applicants to appoint a registered/certified valuer, auctioneer or any other person(s) or agency/body as may deem fit by the applicants to ascertain the value of the affected items before they are disposed of.

  • $1.6bn fraud: Judge rejects request to dismiss cases against Omokore, others

    $1.6bn fraud: Judge rejects request to dismiss cases against Omokore, others

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court in Abuja has thrown out an application seeking, among others, the dismissal of a $1.6bn fraud charge brought against a businessman, Jide Omokore and five others.

    Omokore is being tried with Victor Briggs, David Mbanefo, Abiye Membere and two firms linked to Omokore – Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concepts Limited – on a nine-count, in which they are accused of engaging in criminal diversion of about $1.6bn said to be part of proceeds from the sale of petroleum products belonging to the Federal Government.

    They alleged offences are said to be contrary to section 1 (1) (b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act and punishable under section 1(3) of the same Act.

    The application thrown out by the judge Thursday was argued for Member by his lawyer, Folabi Kuti, who urged the court to dismiss the charge and setting aside the proceedings, or alternatively, strike out an additional proof of evidence dated June 9, 2017, filed by the prosecution on June 17 this year, containing a witness’ statement dated June 7, 2017.

    Kuti had, while arguing the application Thursday, contended that the act of the prosecution constituted an abuse of court process and negated the principle of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015. He said what the prosecution filed; in the real sense of it was not an additional proof of evidence, but a statement of a witness obtained only on June 7, 2017.

    He contended that the witness’ statement obtained after the prosecution had called two witnesses showed that investigation of the case was ongoing contrary to the provisions of the ACJA and Rule 3 of the Federal High Court’s Practice Direction on criminal matters.

    He added: “As of the time this trial was going on investigation had not been concluded.

    “The resulting effect is that the applicant has not been afforded the opportunity to know which case he is coming to face.”

    Other defence lawyers did not file any process either for or against the application, and only said on Thursday that they would leave the decision to the judge’s discretion.

    Responding, lead prosecuting lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) argued that the application was “based on a false premise”.

    He noted that the purpose of front-loading the documents to be used by the prosecution was merely to bring the case of the prosecution to the attention of the defendant in line with section 36(6) of the Constitution.

    He maintained that by virtue of section 379(2) of ACJA, the prosecution was entitled to file an additional proof of evidence at any stage of the trial.

    He added that even if the practice direction had supported Membere’s contention, the practice direction, a directive by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, could not override the provision of ACJA which is an Act of the parliament.

    Justice Dimgba, in a bench ruling, upheld Jacobs’ argument and dismissed Membere’s application. He noted that the jurisdiction to hear a criminal case was donated to the court by the statues prescribing the offences on which the defendants were being tried and not the practice direction.

    Justice Dimgba said by virtue of the provisions of the Advance Fee Fraud and other related Offences Act and the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, the court had been conferred with the jurisdiction to hear the case which involved the offences of advance free fraud and money laundering preferred against the defendants.

    He also held that Section 379(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, cited by the applicant, allowed the prosecution to file an additional proof of evidence at any stage in a trial.

    He added that the law did not limit the prosecution to a particular type of additional evidence, either documentary or oral, that could be filed in court in the course of the trial.

    He held that to interpret the laws “as construed” by the defendant would violate Section 379(2) of ACJA and will create a “judicial clog” in the prosecution procedure created by the law.

    He added that the remedy available to the defendants was not to ask for the dismissal of the charge, but to request more time to enable him study the newly filed documents.

    The judge adjourned to July 5 for continuation of trial.

  • 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.

     

  • NDLEA arraigns driver for alleged possession cocaine

    The National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) on Tuesday arraigned one Haruna Adamu, in a Federal High Court, Abuja, for alleged possession and distribution of 1.2kg of cocaine.

    The prosecution alleged that the defendant sometime in March, conspired under the bridge at Mabushi, Abuja, with one Safianu, now at large, to commit the said crime.
    Adamu’s charge was read by an interpreter and he pleaded not guilty.
    The defendant told the court that he only carried the said Safianu in his taxi and that he knew nothing about the cocaine.
    Ms Hameedat Umar, the counsel to the defendant, prayed the court to grant her client bail on health grounds.
    “I humbly apply that the court should consider the plight of the defendant and grant him bail.
    “He is epileptic and even fell down recently and has not been able to use his right hand since then.”
    The prosecuting counsel, Mr Mike Kassa, told the court that the NDLEA had wanted to release him based on his health condition, but no one to stand as surety for him.
    Kassa further told the court that the defendant was taken to the National Hospital, but the agency could not afford the bill given by the hospital for his treatment.
    The judge, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, admitted the defendant to bail on recognition of his counsel and adjourned the matter till May 16.

     

  • Court rejects Moro’s prayer for foreign medical trip

    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”.

  • Why no record for N558.2m taken monthly by ex-Air chief

    Why no record for N558.2m taken monthly by ex-Air chief

    A key witness in the trial of former Chief of Air Staff, Mohammed Dikko Umar, Air Commodore Salisu Yishau (rtd.) explained on Thursday why there are no receipts for the N558.2million allegedly diverted monthly by Umar while he was in office between October 2010 and September 2012.

    Yushau, a former Director, Finance and Accounts at the Nigerian Air Force (NAF) Headquarters, Abuja, had on Monday told a Federal High Court in Abuja how he always handed US dollar equivalent of N558.2m monthly to Umar.

    He also gave details of how he assisted Umar to buy five choice houses in Abuja, Kaduna Nad Kano from the money he (Umar) allegedly diverted from the NAF.

    Yushau, who was cross-examined yesterday by Umar’s lawyer, Hassan Liman (SAN), said there were manual for financial regulations that provided that there must be receipt for every payment by the NAF

    He explained that all the payment to the COAS was upon his demand being NAF’s chief accounting officer. He added that there the payments were made without any authorising document, and hence, were never receipted.

    The witness agreed with Liman that the NAF’s Financial Regulations Manual contained a mandatory provision that receipts must be issued for all payments by the NAF.

    He explained that “in financial matters, payment means that there is a source document where a request for payment for expenditure is made through the Chief Accounting Officer and authority is given for the expenditure.

    “So, whoever is collecting payment for the expenditure, that payment must be receipted. But, where the Chief Accounting Officer is saying give me this and there is no document, that cannot be said to be payment,” Yishau said.

    The witness confirmed that he knew of the Financial Regulation of 2007 and revised 2009 “which regulates the financial dealings of ministries, departments and agencies, and other government establishments including the Nigerian Armed Forces.”

    He added that the military being a unique government institution, said the financial regulation had a limited binding force on the military.

    “The military is a unique institution and has its own norms, despite the financial regulations. The financial regulation is binding on the armed forces, so long as it does not affect the operational activities of the armed forces,” he said.

    Yishau said under the military’s financial regulations, he as the Director of Finance and Accounts, was the accounting officer for the NAF, but that the Chief of Air Staff was the chief accounting officer.

    The witness said by virtue of that, he was only responsible “for ensuring accountability, transparency, stewardship, probity and financial responsibility in all ramifications in the management of the finance of the Nigerian Air Force” through the Chief of Air Staff.

    In rejecting the suggestion by Liman that it was part of his duty to prepare the budget of the air force, Yushau said: “It is not part of my schedule to prepare and present the budget to the National Assembly.

    “I only give my input into the budget like other directors of the Nigerian Air Force. The budget office, when I was in the Nigerian Air Force was under the Chief of Policy and Plans and there was a Director of the budget under him.

    “My input into the budget was in the form of an extent of implementation for the budget year. What I mean by the budget implementation are the details of the money received within the budget year and the programmes that were executed by the NAF.

    “There were three main signatories to the Nigerian Air Force’s accounts. These were, the Commander Pay and Accounting Group, Ikeja Lagos; the Chief Accountant, usually a senior civilian account staff usually posted from the Accountant-General’s office; and the Air Force’s cashier,” Yushau said.

    The witness said although he had a supervisory role on the Pay and Accounting Group,  the Commander of the group “is responsible to the Chief of Air Staff.”

    He also said there was a time he was a signatory to “an account designated at the headquarters of the Nigerian Air Force for the construction of NAF Conference Centre.

    “There was also an account for a reactivation of that was Nigerian Air Force C130 fleet,” he said.

    Although the lead prosecuting lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir opposed Liman’s move to tender the Manual for Financial Administration for the Armed Forces of Nigeria 2012 signed by the then Chief of Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshall Oluseyi Petinrin, the judge overruled him (Tahir) and admitted the document in evidence.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, in admitting the document, held that it was a was a subsidiary legislation which required no certification.

    He adjourned to March 28 for Tahir to produce Yishau’s statement sought to be tendered by the defence.

  • Dasukigate: Court rejects businessman’s request to treat ulcer abroad

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court, Abuja Wednesday rejected the request by Olugbenga Obadina, Managing Director, Almond Properties Limited for permission to travel abroad to treat ulcer.

    Obadina is standing trial an eight-count charge of money laundering to travel abroad for medical treatment.

    He is accused of collecting N2, 417, 000,000.00 paid into his company’s account in tranches, between 2013 and 2015 from the account of the Office of the National Security Adviser, ONSA, under Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd) without contract award.

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

    Wednesday, Obadina’s lawyer, Chris Uche (SAN) applied for a temporary release of his passport to enable him travel for medical treatment abroad.

    Uche said that the medical papers testifying to the need for the defendant to seek treatment were attached to the affidavit that was deposed to by the applicant himself.

    Prosecution lawyer, Larrys P. Aso, opposed the application on the grounds that the medical papers emanated from the clinic of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), which was not related to the applicant in anyway.

    Aso maintained that the prosecution still held unto its earlier stand that the defendant was a flight risk, adding that ulcer, the ailment the defendant was seeking treatment for could be handled in Nigeria.

    Ruling, Justice Dimgba said that in applying the discretion of the court, he was not minded to grant the application.

    “I have carefully considered the application of the defendant for the release of his passport to travel abroad for medical treatment. Traditionally, the court has always maintained a liberal approach in releasing passport for medical treatment based on the presumption that the defendant is innocent until proved otherwise.

    “Also, going by what transpired on July 15, 2016 during his arraignment where he refused to present his biodata and the happenings of January 27, where questions were raised concerning his surety. Even though the issue of the surety has been resolved, I am not minded to grant the application in favour of the applicant”, Justice Dimgba held.

  • Arms deal: Court rejects Obadina’s request to travel for checkup

    Arms deal: Court rejects Obadina’s request to travel for checkup

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday rejected an application filed by Olugbenga Obadina, a businessman, standing trial for alleged money laundering to travel abroad for medical treatment.

    Obadina was alleged to have received over N2 billion from the Office of the National Security Adviser under retired Col. Sambo Dasuki without a contract award.

    At the resumed hearing, counsel to Obadina, Chief Chris Uche (SAN) made the application for the temporary release of his passport to enable him to travel for medical treatment abroad.

    Uche said that the medical papers testifying to the need for the defendant to seek treatment were attached to the affidavit that was deposed to by the applicant himself.

    The prosecuting counsel, Mr Larry Aso, opposed the application on the grounds that the medical papers emanated from the clinic of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation, which was not related to the applicant in any way.

    Aso maintained that the prosecution still held onto its earlier stand that the defendant was a flight risk, adding that ulcer, the ailment the defendant was seeking treatment for could be handled in Nigeria.

    He added that the prosecution was relying on the records of the court of Jan. 27, where the defendant’s surety, Mrs Maryam Sagir applied to withdraw her suretyship.

    In his ruling, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, said that in applying the discretion of the court, he was not minded to grant the application.

    “I have considered carefully the application of the defendant for the release of his passport to travel abroad for medical treatment.

    “Traditionally, the court has always maintained a liberal approach in releasing passport for medical treatment based on the presumption that the defendant is innocent until proved otherwise.

    “Also, going by what transpired on July 15, 2016 during his arraignment where he refused to present his bio data and the happenings of January 27 were questions were raised concerning his surety ship.

    “Even though the issue of the surety has been resolved, I am not minded to grant the application in favour of the applicant.”

    He dismissed the application, adding that the court might take a different view in a subsequent application if compelling evidence was presented.

    Dimgba adjourned the matter to March 22 for the continuation of hearing.

    Earlier, Mr Victor Agunzi, counsel to Sagir who had applied to withdraw her suretyship told the court that the parties had met and sorted out their differences.

    Agunzi said as a result, Sagir would continue as Obadina’s surety.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Sagir had applied to withdraw her suretyship on the grounds that Obadina had not kept to the conditions they agreed on.