The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Rickey Tarfa

  • Alleged bribery: Prosecution’s absence stalls Rickey Tarfa’s trial

    A Lagos State High Court, Igbosere, yesterday adjourned till today the trial of Chief Rickey Tarfa (SAN) for alleged bribery and unlawful obstruction of public officers.
    Justice Adedayo Akintoye made the order following the absence of prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
    Tarfa is standing trial on a 27-count charge of, among others, age falsification and offering gratification to a public officer, for which he was arraigned by the anti-graft agency.
    At the last adjournment on February 28, the court rejected Oyedepo’s proposal of trial on three dates, two of which fell on a Good Friday and a Saturday.
    It adjourned till noon yesterday for continuation of trial.
    But at the commencement of proceedings, Defence counsel Oluyele Delana and Abiodun Owonikoko, both SANs, observed there was no representation from the EFCC.
    Owonikoko said: “I am taken aback by the prosecution’s absence. No letter was given to the defence to explain their absence.
    “I can confirm that yesterday, I was in court with Mr. Oyedepo for another matter and there was nothing to indicate that he would not be in court. Since that time, I have been to Kaduna and back.
    “It is not fair on the defendant.”
    Justice Akintoye noted the agency’s absence and gave Oyedepo till today to explain his absence.
    “I have recorded their absence. So that they don’t waste our time, we have tomorrow to continue and for them to tell us why,” the judge said.
    The EFCC arraigned Tarfa on March 10, 2016 on a 27-count charge, which was subsequently amended to 26 counts.
    He was accused of alleged wilful obstruction of authorised EFCC officials, refusal to declare assets and giving false information to a public officer.
    The agency also alleged, among others, that the lawyer offered N5.3 million gratification to Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court, Lagos, to allegedly compromise the judge.
    It claimed Tarfa transferred the money in several tranches to Justice Nganjiwa between June 27, 2012 and December 23, 2014.
    Tarfa pleaded not guilty.

  • Appeal Court reserves verdict on Rickey Tarfa’s age falsification appeals

    THE Court of Appeal, Lagos, yesterday reserved judgements on two appeals filed by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Rickey Tarfa, challenging his trial for alleged age falsification and obstruction of law enforcement officers.

    The appeals arose from separate charges filed against Tarfa by Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) before Justice Adedayo Akintoye and Justice Aishat Opesanwo – both of the Lagos High Court, Igbosere.

    The judges had declined Tarfa’s application to quash the charges against him, ruling, among others, that the EFCC’s charges were competent and that the courts had jurisdiction to try the case.

    Yesterday, the appellate court presided over by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba reserved both appeals for judgment after hearing arguments from appellant’s counsel, Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN) and that of the respondent, Rotimi Oyedepo.

    Justice Garba adjourned for judgment, adding that dates will be communicated to parties.

    The EFCC filed a 27-count charge against Tarfa before Justice Akintoye, but in a preliminary objection, he urged the court to quash all counts.

    He claimed the charge was defective and that the commission had no statutory power to try him on the alleged offences.

    Tarfa argued that the proof of evidence supplied by EFCC failed to support the charges, describing them as incompetent and an abuse of court processes.

    But, Justice Akintoye, in her ruling, stated that the objection lacked substance and held that the information filed before the court showed a prima facie case, which must be addressed.

    In refusing Tarfa’s claim that the charges amounted to a violation of his rights, the judge referred to EFCC Establishment Act, which imposed on the anti-graft agency “the statutory duty, obligation and mandate to investigate and prosecute all cases of economic crimes”.

    Justice Opesanwo also dismissed Tarfa’s preliminary objection to the charge of obstructing officers of the law from carrying out their duties.

    Dissatisfied, Tarfa appealed against the rulings and urged the Court of Appeal to declare the charge incompetent and allow his appeal.

    Owonikoko stated that while the appeal was pending, EFCC re-arraigned Tarfa on a reduced 26-count charge, bordering on the same offences it preferred against him on March 10.

    He argued that by allowing EFCC to amend the charge, the lower court overreached the decision of the Court of Appeal.

  • Rickey Tarfa must explain contact with judge, court rules

    A Lagos State High Court in Igbosere yesterday assumed jurisdiction to entertain a two-count charge filed against Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Mr. Rickey Tarfa by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Aishat Opesanwo dismissed Tarfa’s preliminary objection to the charge of obstructing officers of the law from carrying out their duties and attempting to pervert  justice by communicating with a Federal High Court judge handling a suit he filed against the commission.

    She ruled that the information filed by the EFCC against Tarfa suggested that the Learned Silk “had some explaining to do,” as to whether or why he allegedly contacted the judge.

    Tarfa had, in an application filed through his counsel, Mr. Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), argued that the case was an abuse of court process and urged the court to quash the charge and decline jurisdiction.

    Owonikoko argued, among others, that the authority of EFCC to prosecute was limited to economic and financial crimes, which the alleged offences of obstructing officers of the law and attempting to perverse justice were not.

    Furthermore, the senior lawyer told the court that the commission had no powers to prosecute general criminal offences outside its jurisdiction.

    He added that the allegations against Tarfa were the subject of an appeal before the Court of Appeal, and the charge thus constituted an abuse of court process.

    Owonikoko argued that by virtue of Section 286 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law 2004, the EFCC could not be a complainant, an investigator and a prosecutor.

    “The filing of this charge is a clear case of abuse of court process, therefore the proper order is to dismiss the charge,” he stated.

    However, in a 28-paragraph affidavit dated March 28, EFCC’s lawyer Mr. G. K. Latona urged the court to disregard the submission of the defence counsel.

    Latona said an existence of a civil appeal did not have any relation with this case, adding that Nigeria was not a party to the case before the appeal court.

    In an almost two-hour ruling yesterday, Justice Opesanwo found no merit in the defendant’s application.

    The judge ruled that the applicant’s argument that the EFCC was both the accuser, investigator and judge could not be substantiated.

    “No such situation exists in this case,” she ruled.

    The judge held further that EFCC had “since come to be recognised as an agent of the government, whether state or federal, such that there is a presumption that it is an agent of government,” it is thus qualified to institute an action on behalf of both.

    On the allegation of contacting a judge, Justice Opesanwo said: “The facts require the applicant to explain the legitimacy of his actions.”

    “The application is one in which I find no merit and must dismiss in totality,” she held.

    The EFCC, on February 16, arraigned Tarfa on charge No- LD/2417C/16.

    The commission alleged that Tarfa, on February 5, 2016, hid two suspects, Nazaire Sorou Gnanhoue and Modeste Finagnon, both Beninoise, in his Mercedes Benz Sports Utility Vehicle, thereby shielding them from arrest and wilfully obstructing justice.

  • Court dismisses Tarfa’s bid to quash charges

    Court dismisses Tarfa’s bid to quash charges

    A Lagos State High Court in Igbosere on Friday assumed jurisdiction in the 27-count charge filed against the embattled Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice A.A. Akintoye dismissed Tarfa’s preliminary objection, filed through his counsel, Mr. Anthony Idigbe (SAN), urging it to quash the charges and decline jurisdiction on the case.

    Tarfa was arraigned on March 9 for making false statements, offering gratification to a public officer and failure to declare his assets.

    At the resumed hearing on Friday, Justice Akintoye, refused the defendant’s prayers but reserved her decision till the end of the trial on the prayer to declare that falsification of age was not an offence known to law.

    The judge said the EFCC had the power to investigate and prosecute Tarfa.

    “On the charge being an abuse of court process as argued by the accused, I hold that the information contained in the charge before me is different from the one before my learned brother.

    “In that charge what the accused is charged with, is obstructing EFCC officials from effecting their lawful duties.

    “I therefore hold that the information in this charge is not an abuse of court process,” she held.

    The judge also ruled that the commission had the power to ask the defendant to declare his assets anytime, whether upon arrest or later, so far the offences charged were related to financial crimes.

    The offence of gratification of a public officer which the defendant was charged with, falls under the powers of the EFCC, she added.

    “It is my opinion that the information disclosed a prima facie case which established that the accused has a case to answer as alleged by the charge.

    “The court will not restrain a statutory body from performing its statutory duties in respect of anyone.

    “I hold that this court has jurisdiction to entertain this charge, the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this court.

    “I refuse the prayer to quash this charge and I refuse the prayer to restrain the EFCC from investigating or prosecuting the accused,” Akintoye said.

  • We have video evidence to nail Tarfa – EFCC

    We have video evidence to nail Tarfa – EFCC

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Friday told a Lagos State High Court sitting in Igbosere, that it had electronic evidence to convict Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Rickey Tarfa on the charge of failure to declare his assets.
    Tarfa was arraigned on March 9, before Justice A. A. Akintoye on a 27-count charge, including ‎refusal to declare his assets, making false statements, offering gratification to a public officer and failure to declare his assets in the Assets Declaration Form.
    This suit is different from a two-count charge of obstructing officers of law from carrying out their official duties and attempting to pervert the course of justice, also filed against him by the EFCC, but before Justice Aishat Opesanwo.
    At the resumed hearing yesterday, EFCC counsel, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, told the court that the commission had enough evidence including a video recording of Tarfa’s allegedly incriminating conduct at the EFCC office.
    He said that the embattled SAN was placed under electronic surveillance when he twice declared a wrong age in the age declaration form and when he refused to declare his assets in the Assets Declaration Form.
    “We have electronic evidence of the defendant’s conduct. We are keeping our gunpowder dry while waiting for the trial to begin,” Oyedepo said
    The EFCC counsel made this submission while opposing an application by defence counsel, Anthony Idigbe SAN, to quash the charge against Tarfa for lack of jurisdiction among others.
    The commission filed a 12 paragraph counter-affidavit sworn to by Moses Awolusi, an operative of the agency as well as a written address dated March 21, and urged the court to discountenance all the prayers of the applicant.
    Oyedepo cited a plethora of authorities to back his submissions and said Section 27 of the EFCC Act empowered the commission to investigate and prosecute the defendant for the alleged offences.
    He added that the action of the anti-graft agency was not in any way a contravention of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.
    Besides he said he would also be relying on the record of the court on March 9, 2016, in which the court ordered the registrar to read and explain the charge to the defendant, to which he said he understood and pleaded not guilty.
    Again, he said the agency did not need the fiat of the Lagos State Attorney-General before he could prosecute the defendant because the agency is an independent commission empowered to investigate and prosecute any offence related to economic and financial crimes.
    On the issue of declaration of assets, Oyedepo argued that Tarfa was investigated for offering gratification to a public officer, “therefore the Act imposed a duty on him to declare his assets”.
    Tarfa, who was represented by several lawyers including four had earlier argued, through Idigbe, that the EFCC could not be a complainant, investigator, as well as a prosecutor in the case.
    Idigbe said: “We submit that this is contrary to natural justice, equity and good conscience. This is also in breach of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution as amended, which requires that every citizen should have fair hearing, in order to guarantee the independence and impartially in every proceeding.
    “The procedure that such charge should get the Directorate of Public Prosecution (DPP)’s advice was not followed.”
    Idigbe also stated that Sections 172 and 209 makes a provision for compulsory declaration of assets by public officials, but that Tarfa “is not a public official. The charge respecting that cannot be sustained.”
    On his client’s refusal declare his assets Idigbe stated that was the state’s duty to prove its case and that Tarfa had no obligation to provide any fact to an investigator.
    “Any law which compulsorily asks a suspect to declare his assets must conflict with his right to remain silent,” he said.
    Idigbe also accused the commission of duplicity and ambiguity, saying counts one to 27 were mere duplications. The charges, he added, did not disclose when and where the alleged offences were committed, while page 13 was signed by an Assistant Detective Commander rather than a legal officer.
    Justice Akintoye adjourned till April 22, for ruling.

  • Rickey Tarfa knows fate on bid to quash charges April 20

    A Lagos State High Court sitting in Igbosere yesterday adjourned ruling till April 20 in an application to quash the charges filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Mr. Rickey Tarfa (SAN).

    Tarfa is standing trial before Justice Aishat Opesanwo on a two-count charge of obstructing officers of law from carrying out their official duties and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

    Justice Opesanwo fixed the date after listening to arguments from counsel to the defendant, Mr. A. J. Owonikoko and that of the EFCC, Mr. G. K. Latona.

    At the resumed hearing yesterday, Justice Owonikoko urged the court to quash the charges, adding that the EFCC had no right to prosecute any general criminal offences outside economic and financial crimes.

    He said the charges constituted an abuse of court processes and should be quashed.

    He argued that by virtue of Section 286 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law 2004, the EFCC could not be a complainant, an investigator and at the same time a prosecutor.

    “The filing of this charge is a clear case of abuse of court process, therefore the proper order is to dismiss the charge,” Owonikoko said.

    However, EFCC counsel urged the court to disregard the defendant’s submissions.

    The defendant was arraigned by the EFCC on February 16, for allegedly obstructing their officers from carrying out their lawful duties.

    The SAN denied the charges and was granted bail on self-recognisance.

    EFCC told the court that the defendant committed the alleged offences between May 11 and June 25, 2015, also on February 5, 2016, in Lagos.

    It alleged that on February 5 Tarfa willfully obstructed Moses Awolusi and  Sanusi Mohammed, who were EFCC officers, from arresting  Gnanhoue Sourou and Nazaire Odeste.

    EFCC said that the defendant did this “by keeping the said suspects in his car between 11:00 a.m to 4:30 p.m.”

    The prosecutor also alleged that between May 11 and June 25, 2015, the defendant attempted to pervert the course of justice.

    Justice Opesanwo adjourned till April 20 for ruling on the application and for  possible trial.

  • Court orders stay of proceedings in Tarfa’s suit

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on Tuesday asked a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Rickey Tarfa to first defend the criminal charge against him before pursuing civil damages against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Mohammed Idris upheld EFCC’s preliminary objection to Tarfa’s N2.5billion suit. He ordered a stay of proceedings until Tarfa’s trial at the Lagos State High Court is concluded.

    According to him, a substantial part of the reliefs Tarfa sought have a direct bearing on the charge against him.

    He said Tarfa’s vehicle and phones, which the SAN prayed the court to order their release, had been listed as exhibits in the criminal case.

    “Also, it is clear that the information and data retrieved from the mobile handsets are to be used as evidence in the criminal charge pending before the Lagos High Court,” the Judge said.

    Justice Idris said although Tarfa has the guaranteed right to be heard fairly and expeditiously, his fundamental rights suit does not supersede the criminal charge.

    “It should be noted that this right does not stand above the country, the state or the people,” the Judge said.

    Justice added that it would not be fair to the prosecution should Tarfa’s suit be decided in his favour before the criminal case is determined.

  • Tarfa explains relationship with judge

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Rickey Tarfa has denied bribing a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Hyeladzira Ajiya Nganjiwa, with N5.3million.
    He said he read about the allegation in the media and has not been served with a fresh charge.
    Explaining his relationship with the judge, Tarfa said before being appointed to the Bench, Justice Nganjiwa was absorbed into his firm in 1995 immediately after leaving the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) where he rose to the position of Deputy Director (Prosecution).
    Tarfa said Nganjiwa was with his law firm until he was appointed to the Federal High Court in 2012.
    The senior advocate, in a statement  by his Head of Chamber, Mr. John Odubela, said Nganjiwa, who specialised in criminal law, attracted many briefs/clients because of his expertise.
    Tarfa said upon his appointment as a judge, the law firm continued with the cases he brought to the chambers.
    “In the light of the above, we have continued to discharge the firm’s financial obligations to him in respect of cases he has handled for the firm as a practicing legal practitioner in our law firm and those he brought to the chambers,” the statement said.
    Tarfa accused the EFCC of persecution, describing 27 count charge filed against him as ridiculous.
    “We have cause to once more react to the malicious trial by media of our Rickey Tarfa (SAN) by the EFCC. Trials are never won on the pages of newspapers, the airwaves and on online platforms.
    “The recent 27 count charge allegedly filed against Tarfa by EFCC is not only laughable because as at the time of issuing this press statement, Tarfa is yet to be served with the charge. The media is, however, awash with ‘details’ of the said charge.”
    On the allegation of the falsification of age, the statement said Tarfa always marked his birthdays publicly and has no reason to lie about his age.
    “For the umpteenth time, we as a law firm, assure all our clients and members of the public that we are law abiding and would never be involved in any act in contravention of the law of the country.
    “We restate that we appreciate the goodwill, support from colleagues, friends, clients and lovers of human rights, through calls, text messages and personal visits since this persecution commenced and pledge that the 28 year old firm of RickeyTarfa& Co. will continue to practice its trade in the best traditions of the bar.”
  • More trouble for Tarfa over alleged bribe for judge

    More trouble for Tarfa over alleged bribe for judge

    • EFCC slams fresh 27 count charge against SAN
    • Another SAN also for trial over alleged corruption of the bench

    A fresh 27 count charge of bribe for justice now stands against a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Rickey Tarfa at a Lagos High Court.

    Tarfa is accused by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of bribing two judges, Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa and Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira, with N2,335,000.

    Eight witnesses have been lined up against him.

    Also slammed with charges for bribing the two judges is another SAN, Dr. Joseph Nwobike.

    Nwobike, according to the EFCC, gave N1,050,000 to the judges.

    The charges were filed by an Assistant Detective Commander, Mr. G.O. Adebola.

    The charges against Tarfa read in part: “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 10th day of February, 2016 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, failed to declare your assets in the Declaration of Assets Form administered on you by the Economic And Financial Crimes Commission upon your arrest.

    “Refusing to declare assets contrary to section 27(3) (c) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004.

    “Making false information to an officer of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission contrary to section 38(2) (a) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 5th and 6th day of February, 2016 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, knowingly made a false statement to USMAN ZAKARI, (SENIOR DETECTIVE SUPERINTENDENT), an officer of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, in the course of the exercise of his duty, wherein you claimed to be 43 years old.

    “Offering gratification to a public official contrary to section 64 (1) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, No.11, 2011.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 27th day of June, 2012 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N 1, 500,000.00 (One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court directly from your Zenith Bank Account No.1002926967, in order that the said Judge acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 3rd day of October, 2014 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N 835,000.00 (Eight Hundred and Thirty Five Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court directly from your Zenith Bank Account No.1002926967, in order that the said Judge acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 22nd day of December, 2014 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N500, 000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court directly from your Zenith Bank Account No.1002926967, in order that the said Judge acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 27th day of October, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N1, 500, 000.00 (One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court by directly depositing the said sum into Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya in order that the said Judge acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the 27th day of October, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N1, 500, 000.00 (One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court by directly depositing the said sum into Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya in order that the said Judge refrains from acting in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on the on the 8th day of January,2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N500, 000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court by directly depositing the said sum into Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya in order that the said Judge refrains from acting in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on or about the 30th day of November, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N200, 000.00 (Two Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court indirectly through Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya in order that Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you RICKEY TARFA [S.A.N] on or about the 15th day of December, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N500, 000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court indirectly through Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya in order that Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa acts in the exercise of his official duties.” The charges against Nwobike read in part: “That you DR. JOSEPH NWOBIKE [S.A.N] on the 19th day of March, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N 750,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand, Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court directly through your United Bank for Africa Plc Account No.1002664061 in order that the said Judge acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you DR. JOSEPH NWOBIKE [S.A.N] on the 19th day of March, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N 750,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand, Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court directly through your United Bank for Africa Plc Account No.1002664061 in order that the said Judge refrains from acting in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you DR. JOSEPH NWOBIKE [S.A.N] on the 28th day of September, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N 300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court indirectly through Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court in order that the Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa acts in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you DR. JOSEPH NWOBIKE [S.A.N] on the 28th day of September, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, intentionally gave the sum of N 300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court indirectly through Awa Ajia Nig Ltd’s account No. 0000971931 domiciled in Access Bank Plc belonging to Hon. Justice Nganjiwa Hyeladzira Ajiya of the Federal High Court in order that Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa refrain from acting in the exercise of his official duties.

    “That you DR. JOSEPH NWOBIKE [S.A.N] on the 19th day of March, 2015 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, attempted to pervert the course of justice by paying directly through your United Bank for Africa Plc Account No.1002664061 the sum of N 750,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand, Naira only) to Hon. Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court before whom you have instituted and commenced proceedings.”

    Tarfa had earlier been charged with  hiding two suspect and thereby shielding  them from arrest ,as well as  willfully obstructing the course of justice.

    He was also separately charged with bribing Justice Muhammed Yunusa with N225,000

  • EFCC alleges another SAN gave judge N750,000

    EFCC alleges another SAN gave judge N750,000

    • SAN: I helped the judge

    Another Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr Joseph Nwobike, paid N750,000 into the account of Justice Mohammed Yunusa of the Federal High Court, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) alleged Wednesday.

    The allegation is contained in a counter-affidavit filed in opposition to a further and better affidavit filed by Rickey Tarfa (SAN).

    Justice Mohammed Idris Wednesday ruled that Tarfa could adduce new evidence through the further affidavit deposed to by a lawyer, Mohammed Awwal Yunusa.

    In the further and better affidavit, the lawyer said the bank account, which EFCC said Tarfa used to bribe Justice Yunusa, belongs to him, and not to Justice Yunusa as EFCC alleged in its counter-affidavit to Tarfa’s suit.

    The lawyer said Tarfa gave him N225, 000 on January 7, 2014 to help finance his masters in Law degree.

    But EFCC has alleged that Tarfa was not the only SAN to pay money to Justice Yunusa’s account.

    An EFCC operative, Moses Awolusi, said there were new revelations about judges being allegedly induced through “a network of senior lawyers”.

    “Investigation has also shown that as part of this chain of fraud, Mr. Joseph Nwobike (SAN) also transferred the sum of N300, 000 to Hon. Justice H.A Nganjiwa.

    “Investigations further revealed that Hon Justice M.N Yunusa as part of this scheme of fraud also received the sum of N750, 000 from Mr. Joseph Nwobike SAN and Co,” the EFCC investigator said.

    But Nwobike, in a statement to the anti-graft agency, which was also attached to the affidavit, explained that the money was not meant to bribe the judge.

    He said it was the judge who asked him for financial assistance in respect of his mother who was undergoing dialysis due to failing kidney.

    “Sometime ago, Justice Yunusa requested to see me. When I got there, he pleaded with me to assist him with some funds since his mother was under dialysis.

    “He stated that her kidney had parked up and that he needed assistance to cure her. I felt sorry for him. I told him that I did not have funds, but that I would assist him when I had some money.

    “I requested for his account details which he obliged me. When I got some money about two weeks after, I gave the money to him and he thanked me when he saw me along the corridor of the court of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi,” Nwobike said.

    Justice Idris ruled that he would consider the further and better affidavit filed in support of Tarfa’s N2.5billion fundamental rights suit.

    The Senior Advocate sued EFCC for allegedly violating his rights after he was arrested for hiding two suspects, Nazaire Sorou Gnanhoue and Modeste Finagnon, both Beninoise, in his Mercedes Benz Sports Utility (SUV) vehicle, thereby shielding them from arrest.

    EFCC, its chairman Ibrahim Magu, Moses Awolusi, who arrested Tarfa, and Deputy Director Operations, EFCC, Lagos office, Iliyasu Kwarbai are the respondents.

    Tarfa demanded N2.5billion, sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further violating his rights, and asked for N20 million as cost of the suit, among others.

    Justice Idris ruled: “A court will allow a party re-open and adduce further evidence in circumstances of unavailability of the evidence during trial or hearing and in the interest of justice.

    “Interest of justice involves an indulgence, even though it ought to be confined to matter arising ex-improviso, which no human ingenuity could have foreseen. There must have been no indolence, surprise, or otherwise an intention to overreach the other party.

    “The evidence sought to be adduced by the applicant (Tarfa) was one that was not available previously in reply.

    “From the nature of the evidence, it is my respectful view that it is in the interest of the parties and to court that it be allowed at this stage of proceedings for whatever it is worth.

    “I do not consider it repugnant to justice and one intended to overreach the case. I shall stop here and say no more. The application succeeds and it is granted as prayed.

    “The respondents (EFCC and others) are at liberty to respond to the fresh evidence adduced by the applicant herein.”

    It was in the response filed by its lawyer Wahab Shittu that EFCC alleged that Nwobike paid the money to Justice Yunusa.

    Justice Idris adjourned until today for hearing.