Tag: Ricky Tarfa

  • MTN confirms call logs between Justice Yunusa, Ricky Tarfa

    A FRAUD analyst working with MTN Communications, Mr. Adekunle Ogunbadejo, has confirmed to an Ikeja Special Offences Court the call logs between a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Mohammed Yunusa and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Ricky Tarfa.

    Ogunbadejo, who is the first prosecution witness for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), was being led in evidence by Mr. Wahab Shittu, the lead prosecuting counsel for the commission before Justice Sherifat Solebo.

    Justice Yunusa is facing a four-count of attempted perversion of the course of justice and corruption by a public official. Co-defendant and an employee with law firm of Ricky Tarfa (SAN), Esther Agbo, is facing a charge of offering gratification to a public official.

    During proceedings yesterday, Ogunbadejo told the court that call log contained the records of two numbers,  which belong to one Rickey Mustapha Tarfa and one Mohammed Nasir Yunusa.

    “There were several calls made between these numbers,” he said.

    Shittu’s attempt to make Ogunbadejo testify about his statement on oath made to the EFCC was, however, opposed by Justice Yunusa’s defence counsel, Chief Robert Clarke (SAN) and Agbo’s defence counsel Mr. John Odubela (SAN).

    Their objection was on the grounds that it was not served on their team as part of the proof of evidence, which should be forwarded to the defence.

    Justice Sherifat Solebo, while upholding the objection of the defence, said: “In view of the tardiness of the prosecution and lack of proof of service of the statement to the defence, it is hereby marked rejected.”

    Under cross-examination by Clarke, Ogunbadejo admitted that he was not privy to the content of the phone conversations between the judge and Mr. Rickey Tarfa (SAN).

    “We (MTN) do not give cloned sim cards; we do not keep records of verbal communications; we do not keep the content of text messages; and we are not privy to conversations between two parties,” the MTN fraud analyst said.

    The second prosecution witness and the Head of Regulatory Liaison at UBA, Mr. Robinson Imafidon, also told the court that in 2016, following the EFCC’s request, UBA provided the statement of the account of the judge to the anti-graft agency.

    “The owner of the account is Mohammed Nasir Yunusa,  on March 18, 2015 there was a transfer of N750,000 from one Joseph Nwobike, SAN and Co.

    “On May 14, 2015, there was a cash deposit into the account of N1.5million by one Agbo Esther,” he said.

    Under cross-examination by Clarke, Imafidon admitted that he was not aware of the purpose of the bank transaction.

    “I do not know the reason for the transfer by Esther Agbo,” Imafidon said.

    Earlier during proceedings, Justice Solebo, in a short ruling, admitted into evidence, a letter from MTN, which was certified by the EFCC.

    On July 4, the defence had opposed the admissibility of the letter on the grounds that the anti-graft agency could not certify a document from MTN.

    In the ruling, Justice Solebo noted that the letter, which certified the MTN call logs, was retrieved during investigations by the anti-graft agency.

  • Alleged bribery: Court summons Tarfa’s witnesses

    A Lagos High Court sitting in Igbosere on Tuesday summoned defence witnesses in the alleged bribery trial of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa.

    The court signed a subpoena for their appearance following an application by Tarfa through his counsel, Mr. Abiodun Owonikoko.

    The witnesses, who were not identified, are required to appear before Justice Adedayo Akintoye on the next adjourned date of March 22.

    Tarfa was due to open his defence on Tuesday following the dismissal of his no-case submission on  February 9.

    In that ruling, Justice Akintoye found as unmeritorious Tarfa’s claim of N520 million from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) as damages for malicious prosecution.

    The judge ordered the defendant to open his case on the next adjourned date.

    But proceedings stalled when Owonikoko told the judge that the witnesses declined involvement in the case unless by an official invitation.

    Owonikoko said the subpoena had just been signed.

    He prayed the court to adjourn so that the witnesses could be served.

    The EFCC counsel, Nnemeka Omewa, did not object to the request.

    The Commission arraigned Tarfa on March 10, 2016 on a 27-count charge which was subsequently amended to 26 counts.

    He was accused of alleged willful obstruction of authorised EFCC officials, refusal to declare assets and giving false information to a public officer by lying about his age.

     

  • Obstruction of justice: Court dismisses Tarfa’s no-case submission

    Obstruction of justice: Court dismisses Tarfa’s no-case submission

    The Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja on Monday dismissed a no-case submission filed by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa, during his trial for obstruction and perverting the course of justice.

    Tarfa had informed the court that he had no case to answer  when he was about to open his defence during proceedings.

    Justice Aishat Opesanwo, said in a ruling the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had established a prima facie case against Tarfa and he should proceed with his defence.

    The judge also did not award the lawyer N150 million in exemplary damages for “malicious prosecution” which he had demanded from the anti-graft agency.

    She said: “I have taken consideration of Section 38(2) of the EFCC Act and Section 97(3) of the Criminal Law of Lagos 2011, the oral and documentary evidence given by the prosecution.

    “I am satisfied that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the defendant.

    “I invite the defendant to proceed with his defence of the three-count charge contained in the information herein.”

    Tarfa is arraigned for obstruction of justice and perverting the course of justice by the EFCC.

    The Commission alleged that Tarfa willfully obstructed two of its officers — Moses Awolusi and Sanusi Mohammed — from arresting his clients within the premises of Lagos High Court in Igbosere.

    Tarfa’s clients – Gnanhoue Sourou and Nazaire Odeste – were alleged by the EFFC to have committed some financial crimes.

    The EFCC also alleged that Tarfa engaged in alleged illegal and secret communication with Justice Mohammed Yunusa, a Federal High Court judge, who presided over the case.

    NAN

     

  • Court dismisses Ricky Tarfa’s ‘no case’ submission

    Court dismisses Ricky Tarfa’s ‘no case’ submission

    A Lagos High Court sitting in Igbosere on Friday dismissed the no case submission made by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Rickey Tarfa.

    Justice Adedayo Akintoye ruled that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had substantially proved its case against Tarfa.

    The judge noted that the justice of the case thus requires that the court should demand some explanations from the defendant in respect of the charges.

    She ordered Tarfa to enter his defence on the next adjourned date – March 13.

    Justice Akintoye also dismissed Tarfa’s application; seeking N520 million from the EFCC as damages for alleged malicious prosecution.

    The judge described the application as unmeritorious.

    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 willful obstruction of authorised EFCC officials, refusal to declare assets and giving false information to a public officer by lying about his age.

    The Commission also alleged, among others, that the lawyer offered N5.3million gratification to Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa in order to compromise the judge.

    Tarfa pleaded not guilty to the charges.

     

  • Tarfa demands N500m from EFCC over ‘malicious prosecution’

    Tarfa demands N500m from EFCC over ‘malicious prosecution’

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa, is seeking N500 million from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) as damages for alleged malicious prosecution.

    Tarfa made the application on Wednesday in a no-case submission filed before the Lagos High Court in Igbosere, in response to the EFCC’s criminal charges against him.

    The lawyer, through his counsel, Mr. Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), told Justice Adedayo Akintunde that the 26-count charge of alleged bribery and attempt to pervert the course of justice was malicious.

    He prayed the court to make an example of the EFCC and “award N500m damages against the Commission.”

    Tarfa has been standing trial before the judge since March 2016.

    On October 23 last year, the anti-graft agency closed its case against the defendant following which he indicated his intention to file a no-case submission.

    At Wednesday’s proceedings, Owonikoko picked holes in the Commission’s claims that Tarfa “refused and failed” to declare his assets, contrary to the EFCC Act.

    According to him, Tarfa was entirely within his constitutional right to remain silent on the matter.

    On the allegation in count three that the defendant lied about his age during interrogation on February 5, 2016 at the Commission’s Lagos office, Owonikoko distinguished between falsehood and a mistake.

    According to him, Tarfa made a mistake, which the EFCC ought to have drawn his attention to, rather than springing a surprise on him by making the mistake a basis for a criminal charge.

    Owonikoko also contested the charge that the defendant offered gratification to Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court, Bayelsa.

    He submitted, among others, that the EFCC failed to link to Justice Nganjiwa, the deposits made by Tarfa to the accounts of a firm, Awa Ajia Nigeria Limited.

    According to him, Tarfa “has never handled a case before Justice Nganjiwa.”

  • EFCC urges court to dismiss Tarfa’s no-case submission

    EFCC urges court to dismiss Tarfa’s no-case submission

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ) on Tuesday filed a counter-affidavit opposing a no-case submission filed by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Rickey Tarfa.

    The Commission accused Tarfa of bribery and unlawful obstruction of public officers.

    The trial began in March last year before Justice Adedayo Akintoye of the Lagos State High Court, Igbosere.

    EFCC called five witnesses in the trial and tendered 20 exhibits.

    Rather than open his case, Tarfa filed a no-case submission, contending that EFCC did not sufficiently prove the case to warrant him opening his defence.

    He urged the court to dismiss the charge and discharge him on the basis that he has no case to answer.

    But, EFCC, in the counter-affidavit deposed to by an operative, Zakari Usman, said the prosecution made out a prima facie (evident) case against Tarfa based on witness testimonies and tendered exhibits.

    “The evidence of the prosecution witness is strong and un-discredited. This Honourable Court can rely on it to safely convict the applicant.

    “The applicant has a case to answer in view of the overwhelming evidence adduced by the prosecution in the course of the applicant’s trial,” Usman said.

    EFCC said in view of the evidence led by the prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, Tarfa ought to be called upon to open his defence.

    The Commission urged the court to dismiss the lawyer’s application that he be discharged and acquitted.

    The prosecution added that the charge was not an abuse of prosecutorial powers.

    “The Commission did not need a petition or complaint to cause investigation to be conducted on any person who is reasonably suspected to have committed economic and financial related crimes,” the deponent said.

    According to Usman, the EFCC through its officers investigated the case discretely and professionally, adding that the Commission diligently prosecuted the defendant.

    “The applicant is not entitled to any exemplary damages as the prosecution of this case against the applicant was not malicious.

    “It will be in the interest of justice to refuse this application, more so when the evidence adduced by the prosecution against the applicant before this honourable court clearly established a prima facie case against the applicant,” EFCC said.

    The EFCC arraigned Tarfa on March 10, last year, on a 27-count charge which was amended to 26 counts.

    He was accused of willful obstruction of authorised EFCC officials, refusal to declare assets and giving false information to a public officer.

    The agency also alleged, among others, that Tarfa offered N5.3million gratification to Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court, Lagos, in order to compromise the judge.

  • Alleged perversion of course of justice: Ricky Tarfa makes no-case submission

    Alleged perversion of course of justice: Ricky Tarfa makes no-case submission

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa, standing trial over alleged gratification and attempt to pervert the course of justice has told a Lagos High Court sitting in Igbosere that he has no case to answer.

    At the resume of proceedings of his trial yesterday before Justice Adedayo Akintoye, Tarfa, through his counsel, Mr Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), told the court that he has filed a no-case submission.

    Owonikoko said he filed on November 9, to say that the defendant has no case to answer.

    The learned silk stated that the application is supported with an affidavit and a written address and that the prosecution has been duly served.

    He said: “At the last adjourned date, the prosecution closed their case. Upon the view of the prosecution, our response in this case is a no-case submission. That will suffice in this case.”

    Owonikoko, therefore, urged the court to discharge the defendant on the ground that there is no-case to answer.

    “I urge your lordship to discharge the defendant on the view that there is no case to answer.”

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had on October 23 closed its case against the defendant after calling six witnesses, who testified against Rickey Tarfa in a trial, which began in March, 2016.

    EFCC prosecuting counsel Mr. Nnemeka Omewa confirmed the service of the no-case submission application on them by the defence.

    He, however, said they were yet to file a reply.

    “We were served late last Friday with a 54 paragraphs of  a no-case submission. We are still going through them and we have not been able to respond to the no-case submission. We shall be asking for a short adjournment to enable us respond.”

    Justice Adedayo Akintoye adjourned to December 12, for hearing of the application.

    The EFCC had first arraigned Tarfa on March 9, 2016 on a 27-count charge, bordering on offering of gratification to some judges and perversion of the course of justice.

    The anti-graft agency had alleged that Tarfa offered N5.3 million gratification to a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa, to “compromise” the judge.

    The agency claimed that Tarfa transferred the money in several tranches to the judge between June 27, 2012 and December 23, 2014.

    The commission alleged that the SAN lied about his age and failed to declare his assets to the commission upon his arrest on February 5, 2015.

    The offences contravened Section 64 (1) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011.

    But Tarfa pleaded not guilty.

    He subsequently sought to quash the charges on the premise that they were incompetent.

    Justice Akintoye dismissed his application consequent upon which Tarfa appealed the court’s decision.

    But the upper court, in a ruling, ordered Tarfa back to the High Court for trial in respect of the charges preferred against him by the EFCC.

  • Tarfa refused to declare age seven times – Witness

    Tarfa refused to declare age seven times – Witness

    The Lagos High Court, Igbosere, heard on Wednesday how a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Rickey Tarfa, allegedly declined to declare his age to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    An officer from the EFCC Special Task Force Unit, Zakari Usman, testified that Tarfa refused to declare his age seven times during his investigation for alleged obstruction of the agency’s operatives.

    He stated this during the viewing of a video tendered by the commission in support of its case against the defendant.

    Tarfa was arrested on February 9, 2016 for allegedly hiding two suspects – Nazaire Sorou Gnanhoue and Modeste Finagnon, both Beninoise – in his Mercedes Benz Sports Utility Vehicle (SUV), thereby shielding them from being arrested and willfully obstructing the course of justice.

    He was arraigned on March 10, 2016 and pleaded not guilty to a 27-count charge which was subsequently amended to 26 counts.

    Usman, the fourth prosecution witness, was led in evidence by the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, while Oluyele Delano and Abiodun Owonikoko, both SANs, represented the defendant.

    The witness testified that the assets declaration form issued to Tarfa by the agency had a column requiring age declaration in seven places, but the defendant left all the spaces blank.

    He said Tarfa also failed to declare his assets contrary to Section 7(a) and (b) of the EFCC Act.

    He told Justice Adedayo Akintoye that he and three other EFCC operatives were present when the defendant failed to make the required entries in the assets declaration form.

    Usman narrated how he was assigned to investigate a complaint against Tarfa on February 5, 2016, through a letter sent to his team.

    His team, he added, wrote a letter to Guarantee Trust Bank (GTB) and information contained in the bank’s response showed the defendant’s date of birth as February 23, 1950.

    The prosecution also played a video in court titled: “Rickey Tarfa refusal,” which allegedly showed the defendant’s alleged refusal to fill the form.

    Usman said the agency made the video on February 10, 2016 during its interrogation of the defendant.

     

  • Age falsification: Court reserves judgments on Tarfa’s appeals

    Age falsification: Court reserves judgments on Tarfa’s appeals

    The Court of Appeal, Lagos, on Thursday reserved judgements on two appeals filed by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Rickey Tarfa, challenging his trial for alleged age falsification and obstruction of law enforcement officers carrying out their duties.

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

    Both 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.

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

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

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

    He claimed the charges were 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 the EFCC failed to support the charges, describing them as incompetent and abuse of court processes.

  • Ricky Tarfa’s trial stalled as defence  accuses EFCC of withholding documents

    Ricky Tarfa’s trial stalled as defence accuses EFCC of withholding documents

    THE trial of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa, who is facing charges of obstruction of justice, was yesterday stalled at a Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja.

    Reason: the prosecution, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), failed to provide the defence team the necessary documents required for the trial.

    EFCC, in the case filed before Justice Aishat Opesanwo, had alleged that Tarfa on February 5, hid two suspects, Nazaire Sorou Gnanhoue and Modeste Finagnon – both Beninoise – in his Mercedes Benz Sports Utility car, thereby shielding them from being arrested and willfully obstructing the course of justice.

    The suspects were standing trial for alleged fraudulent conversion of some sophisticated manufacturing equipment, property of Rane Prestige Nigeria Limited for their personal use.

    They were also being investigated for alleged tax evasion running into millions of Naira.

    Tarfa allegedly prevented two operatives of the EFCC, who wanted to arrest the suspects at the premises of the state high court, Igbosere, from carrying out their statutory duties.

    At the resumed hearing of the matter yesterday before Justice Aishat Opesanwo, counsel to the prosecution, Abba Mohammed, tendered before the court petition written by the prosecution witness, Awolusi Moses, informing the Deputy Director of Operation, EFCC, how the defendant allegedly prevented the arrest of the suspects.

    But the defence counsel, Mr. Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN) , in his response,  objected to the tendering of the document on the ground that it was not included in the proof of evidence filed before the court by the prosecution.

    “The petition written by the PW1(first prosecution witness) was not front-loaded in the proof of evidence of the prosecution. The EFCC adopted a tactics of trial by ambush as we are never aware of the petition as part of proof of evidence, contrary to standard rule of criminal procedure,” he said.

    The trial judge, Justice Opesanwo,  expressed her disgust over  the action of the EFCC in respect of the matter, which, she noted, was of public importance and interest.

    She remarked that the court vacated other matters scheduled for yesterday because of the importance attached to the charges preferred against the senior lawyer, pointing out that it was obvious the agency was not prepared for this trial.

    She ordered the prosecution to put its house in order and adjourned the matter till October 31, for continuation of hearing.