The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Rotimi Jacobs (SAN)

  • Court reserves judgment on admissibility of evidence against Jang

    Justice Daniel Longji of the Plateau State High Court on Tuesday reserved ruling on the admissibility or otherwise of a Zenith Bank statement in court in the ongoing trial of former Governor of Plateau State, Jonah David Jang.

    The former Governor is standing trial in a 12-count charge preferred against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), for allegedly misappropriating over N6.3billion two months to the end of his tenure as governor in 2015.

    Read Also:Jang congratulates Atiku, pledges total support

    At the resumed hearing of the case in Jos on Tuesday, Counsel to the EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs SAN had sought to tender a Zenith Bank Statement before the court through its Prosecution Witness Mr. Emmanuel Kapanjang which was objected to by the Defense Counsel, Mr Mike Ozekhome, SAN.

    In his submission, the EFCC Counsel urged the court to admit the Bank statement as evidence arguing that the witness who is a Senior Assistant Manager with Zenith Bank, was in a position to testify on its content, having managed the Account of the Second Accused person, Mr Yusuf Pam, a former Cashier in the Office of the Secretary to the State Government during Jang’s administration

    But the Defense Counsel, Mike Ozekhome, SAN who  cited several legal documents in his objection, questioned the whereabouts of the signatories  to the Bank Statement arguing that it was wrong for the Prosecution Counsel to seek to tender  a document through a witness who was neither a party to it nor did he know the content of the document .

    “My Lord, although the document appears to be the original, there is no foundation for the Prosecution Counsel to seek to tender it through the witness whose name is not on it neither does he know the content. This is a direct assault on Sections 83 and 84 of the Evidence Act. I therefore urge the court to reject the document in its entirety”

    After taking arguments from both Counsels, Justice Longji said ruling on the matter is reserved till Wednesday, 5th December, 2018.

  • Alleged fraud: You have case to answer, court tells Dokpesi

    …Asks him to open defence Feb 21

     

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected the no-case submission made by businessman, Raymond Dokpesi and his company, Daar Investment and Holdings Company Limited in their trial on charges of alleged breach of procurement law to the tune of N2.1billion

    Justice John Tsoho, in a ruling on Wednesday, rejected the argument by the defence team led by Kanu Agabi (SAN), to the effect that the prosecution has not made out against the defendants to warrant their being called to enter a defence.

    Read Also:Alleged N2.1bn money laundering: Direct your probe at Dasuki, Jonathan, Dokpesi tells court

    The judge upheld the argument by the prosecution led by Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) to the effect that the court is, at this stage, only to establish whether or not a prima facie case has been established against the defendants, not to evaluate the evidence led and establish the guilt or otherwise of the defendants.

    Justice Tsoho said, by the evidence led by the prosecution through its witnesses, a prima facie case has been established, requiring the defendants to say their own side of the story.

    The defendants are being tied on a seven-count charge brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    They are charged with money laundering, procurement fraud and accused of fraudulently receiving N2.1bn from the office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) between January and March 2015.

     

    Details later….

  • CCT halts Saraki’s trial to await Supreme Court’s decision

    CCT halts Saraki’s trial to await Supreme Court’s decision

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Thursday halted further proceedings in the false assets declaration trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki to await the decision of the Supreme Court in pending appeals relating to the case.

    CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar announced an indefinite adjournment in the trial yesterday, which was earlier scheduled for parties to adopt their final written addresses.

    The CCT had earlier ended the trial abruptly when on June 14, 2017; it upheld the no-case submission made by Saraki, to the effect that the prosecution was unable to establish its case against him.

    Upon an appeal by the prosecution, the Court of Appeal, Abuja, in a judgment on December 12, 2017, partially set aside the CCT’s decision on Saraki’s no-case submission.

    The Court of Appeal upheld the CCT’s decision in respect of 15 out of the 18 counts contained in the charge against Saraki, on the grounds that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case to warrant the defendant to be called to enter his defence in relation to the 15 counts.

    In relation to the remaining three counts, the Court of Appeal held that the prosecution led sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against Saraki, and ordered him to enter his defence on the three counts.

    Saraki later appealed, at the Supreme Court, that portion of the Court of Appeal judgment ordering him to enter defence in relation to the three counts. He prayed the Supreme Court to restore the CCT decision, upholding his no-case submission.

    The prosecution cross-appealed, at the Supreme Court, the portion of the Court of Appeal judgment which voided 15 of the 18 counts in the charge against Saraki. It urged the Supreme Court to restore all the 18 counts and order Saraki to enter defence in respect of all the counts.

    Despite the appeals by parties, the CCT ordered the recommencement of Saraki’s trial on February 6 this year, during which the Senate President called his only witness and closed his case, following which the tribunal adjourned to February 27 for the adoption of final written addresses.

    The adoption failed to hold on February 27 because the defence, led by Kanu Agabi (SAN) prayed for time to file a response to the prosecution’s final address, which he said was served on his team late. The tribunal the adjourned to February 7.

    When parties got to the tribunal yesterday, Umar sought parties’ opinion on whether the tribunal could proceed with the trial in view of their appeals pending before the Supreme Court.

    In reaction, lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), objected to the postponement of proceedings “in view of the position of the law today”.

    Citing Section of 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), Jacobs said the provision enjoins the court not to entertain any application for stay of proceedings in a criminal trial.

    He noted that the Supreme Court has equally interpreted and upheld that provision of the ACJA in the case of Metuh and the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    Jacobs argued that Section 305 of the ACJA, which the tribunal Chairman referred to, had to do with reference of an issue to a higher court.

    He noted that the appeals pending before the Supreme Court do not amount to referral.

    Jacobs added: “Assuming it has to do with reference, that section allows your lordship to go on.”

    He also drew the tribunal’s attention to a letter dated January 19, 2018, which Saraki wrote to the CCT asking for the trial to be suspended pending the determination of the appeals pending at the Supreme Court.

    On the letter, Jacobs argued that since the defence chose to proceed with the trial by calling its only witness on February 6, it was too late in the day for them to pursue the prayers contained in their letter dated January 19 and sent to the CCT.

    In a counter argument, Agabi noted that the question about the necessity of an adjournment pending the Supreme Court’s decision on the appeals by parties was the initiative of the tribunal and not the defence’s.

    Agabi noted that since both parties have pending appeals at the Supreme Court that relate to the trial, it was better to await the decision of the apex court on the matter.

    He also said the Supreme Court had on Wednesday invited parties to appear for the hearing of the appeals next Thursday, March 15.

    Agabi siad:”We must be mindful of the dignity of the Supreme Court.”

    On why the defence, chose to proceed on February 6 rather that pursue its earlier request for the suspension of the trial pending the Supreme Court’s decision, Agabi said: “You (the tribunal) summoned us here and we came here”. Since you said we should proceed we proceeded.”

    Agabi stressed the need to halt further proceedings in the trial in order not to jeopardise the appeals before the Supreme Court. He added:  “A right of appeal ought not to be unduly fettered.”

    Ruling, Umar noted that each of the parties has an appeal pending before the Supreme Court in relation to the trial.

    The CCT Chair in view of the right to fair hearing and the right of appeal, from lower court to appellate court, there was the need for the tribunal “to tarry awhile so that the integrity of the Supreme Court will not be played with.”

    He subsequently adjourned to await the outcome of the pending appeals at the Supreme Court.

    Read Also: CCT trial: Saraki closes case after calling a witness

  • Supreme Court to hear Dasuki’s appeal on bail Jan 25

    Supreme Court to hear Dasuki’s appeal on bail Jan 25

    The Supreme Court has fixed January 25 next year for the hearing of an appeal by former National Security Adviser (NSA) Mohammed Sambo Dasuki.

    Dasuki’s appeal is against an earlier decision by the Court of Appeal, Abuja, dismissing his complaint that his continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) after the bail granted him by some courts was unlawful.

    Thursday at the Supreme Court, parties regularised their processes before a five-man panel of the court led by Justice Musa Datijo Mohammed. Joseph Daudu (SAN) led a team of lawyers for the appellant, while Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) led the team for the Federal Government.

    Dasuki, in his brief of argument, stated that on December 29, 2015 at the Kuje Prisons and shortly after perfecting the third bail conditions, the operatives of DSS abducted him to their custody without fresh charges thereby disobeying the court orders on the bail matter.

    He said sometime in 2015 he was arraigned before a Federal High Court in Abuja on charges of unlawful possession of firearms and money laundering.

    He claimed that based on his applications, he was admitted to bail on various conditions by the Federal High Court to enable him prepare for his defence and that he subsequently met all the bail conditions.

    Dasuki said he was thereafter taken to two High Courts of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) on separate charges of money laundering, conspiracy and breach of trust. He said upon his application, the two trial judges – Justices Hussein Baba Yusuf and peter Affem – admitted him to bail to enable him prepare for his defence.

    He stated that the Community Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in a 2016 judgment on his fundamental rights enforcement suit, ordered the Federal Government to effect his release. He said despite the judgment, he was yet to be released.

    He wants the Supreme Court to compel the Federal government to obey the orders for bail granted him by courts. Alternatively, he wants the apex court to stop his trial at both the Federal High Court and High Court of the FCT, pending when the government will allow him to enjoy the bail granted him.

    In a counter argument in its respondent’s brief, the Fed Govt wants the court to dismiss the appeal and uphold the decision of the Court of Appeal to the effect that his continued incarceration was not a violation of any pending order for his release.

    It argued that all orders in respect of the bail granted the appellant by the three courts have been obeyed.

  • Alleged fraud: Ex-governor Nyame justifies extra-budgetary expenditure

    Alleged fraud: Ex-governor Nyame justifies extra-budgetary expenditure

    Former governor of Taraba State, Jolly Nyame said extra-budgetary expenditure is normal when executing government projects as there is always room for supplementary budget.

    Nyame who testified in an FCT High Court, Gudu in a N1.64 billion fraud case filed against him, said he was prudent in spending state funds during his tenure.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ), slammed a 21-count charge on Nyame, bordering on misappropriation of Taraba funds to the tune of N1.64billion during his tenure as governor.

    Nyame, who was cross examined by EFCC’s prosecutor, Mr Rotimi Jacobs ( SAN ), was responding to a question on whether he regarded spending state funds outside budgetary provision as prudent.

    The prosecution served the former governor with exhibit 001, which was money budgeted for the Governor’s Office during his tenure in 2005.

    The Governor’s Office made an excess expenditure of N982million.
    In his response, Nyame said, “budgets are only estimates,’’ adding that he considered himself being prudent with state funds though he exceeded budgetary provisions “because I performed.’’

    Jacobs also made available exhibit 002, being overhead cost for 2006 for the Governor’s Office.

    The House of Assembly approved N40 million, while N713million was spent, with an excess expenditure of N673million.

    When asked by Jacobs if he regarded that as being prudent too, Nyame replied, “My Lord, I was prudent and it could have been the House of Assembly that could have proved otherwise.’’

    In 2007, N100million was budgeted for the Governor’s Office as overhead, while N2.1billion was spent, with N2billion as excess expenditure.

    When asked by the prosecution if he knew that it was an offence to exceed the budget estimate, the former governor replied that he knew, but only if there was no supplementary budget.

    Nyame said that exceeding budget estimates was normal when executing government projects and that “there is room for supplementary budget.’’

    Justice Adebukola Banjoko adjourned the case until Oct. 12 for continuation of cross examination.

    NAN

  • $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 Badeh bought N240m house for his son – EFCC

    How Badeh bought N240m house for his son – EFCC

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) disclosed Tuesday how it found a house in Abuja bought at N240million Abuja house and furnished with N134million for his son, Alex Badeh junior.

    An operative of the EFCC, Abubakar Madaki, told a Federal High Court in Abuja Tuesday that he was the head of a task force that investigated a report from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) in 2015, which formed the basis of the 10 count-charge of money laundering filed against Badeh and a company, Iyalikam Nigeria Limited.

    Madaki, who testified Tuesday as the 19th prosecution witness in the trial of Badeh and his firm, said Badeh’s  Bank Verification Number (BVN) linked the former Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal to the purchase of the house.

    Led in evidence by lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), Madaki said Badeh bought the house located  at 19, Ogun River Crescent, Abuja for his son, Alex Badeh (Jnr) in 2013.

    The witness said the house was paid for in cash with dollar equivalent of N240m and that the property was furnished with N80m and air conditioning system was installed in the house with N12m.

    He added that N42m was spent on installation of camera view and swimming pool in the house, and that the N134m spent on installing the facilities and furniture in the house was  paid directly from the account of the Nigerian Air Force.

    Madaki said the house at 19; Ogun River Crescent, Abuja was one of the numerous properties linked to Badeh.

    He said a tenancy agreement between Badeh’s son and a firm – Platinum Universal Construction Company (PUCC) – was drafted to conceal Alex Badeh (Jnr)’s true ownership of the house.

    The witness stated that when Badeh’s son (for who the house was bought) was invited by the EFCC, he initially claimed to be a tenant in the house, and that he rented it from PUCC.

    Madaki said, “For 19, Kumasi Crescent, Abuja, the occupant happened to be the son of the first defendant (Badeh) and his name is Alex Badeh Jnr.

    “He was not at home but was request to report at the EFCC office by the next day.

    “The next day, he reported and explained that he was renting the house from Platinum Universal Construction Company and that his rent was due to expire in 2014.

    “Because of the claim, I instructed some officers to follow him and conduct a search of the house.

    “After the search, they came back and he was released and asked to return in two days. But he said he was scheduled to fly a private plane as a pilot and would be unable to come that day.

    “He came back the next day but we told him we were still making enquiries and that whenever we were ready we would notify him.

    “Based on the name given to us by him as his landlord, we tried to conduct a search through BVN.

    “Having verified it, we discovered that the company had an account with Zenith Bank and another with GT Bank.

    “We requested the account documentation. We discovered that the Nigerian Air Force had had paid N92m into the company’s Zenith Bank account and N42m in two installments – N18m and, N24m. Altogether N42m was paid into the GTB account.

    “We now invited the owner of the company, Kabiru Salau.When he came; he came with a tenancy agreement between Alex Badeh (Jnr) and the company claiming that Alex Badeh Jnr rented the apartment from his company.

    “We inquired to know if he had any contract with the Nigerian Air Force and he said ‘yes it was long time ago’ when he was paid N356m for the renovation of the Nigerian Air Force Guest House.

    “And he said he had not done any other contract with the Nigerian Air Force and was still insisting that he rented the apartment to Alex Badeh Jnr.

    “He was then served with the company’s statements of account. Having gone through the statements of account, he started sweating.

    “After some time, he said he would say the truth. He explained that actually, it was not true that Alex Badeh rented the apartment.

    “He said sometimes in 2013, a friend of his introduced the property No 9, Kumasi Street to him, that he intended to sell it.

    “And coincidentally, Salisu Yishau (the first prosecution witness in the trial – PW1) who gave him the job of renovating the Nigerian Air Force Guest House contacted him that he should get a befitting apartment for the son of the Air Chief of Staff, the first defendant, was asked to go and negotiate.

    “He negotiated with the owner of the property fromN300m to N260m. He contacted Salisu Yishau and the fund was made available in dollar equivalent.

    “Having paid the fund, he requested the name to be used for the document. He contacted  who said he was going to speak with the first defendant.

    “After sometime, PW1 got back to him, and said he should use the name of his company, Platinum Universal Construction Company (PUCC) to purchase the property.

    “It was after the agreement that Alex Badeh Jnr met him through PW1 to take possession of the property.”

    The witness added that when Alex Badeh Jnr inspected the house, he requested for a company that could furnish the house, shortly after N92m was transferred from the Nigerian Air Force’s account to PUCC’s account for that purpose.

    Madaki added that: “Few hours later the company, Platinum Universal Construction Company received an alert of N92m from NAF.

    “He called Alex Badeh to confirm if the money was from him because it was paid through the account of the Nigerian Air Force and he answered in the affirmative.”

    Madaki stated that out of the N92m, N80m was transferred to the account of a Lagos company which did the furnishing job and the balance of N12m was spent on the installation of air conditioning system.

    The witness said another N80m was received from NAF’s account for installation of camera view and swimming pool.

    Madaki said: “The sum of N12m was used for the purchase of air conditioners which were installed in the house.

    “Having furnished the house, he was about handing over the key to Alex Badeh Jnr when Alex Badeh Jnr told him that he needed a camera view and swimming pool in the house.

    “Not quite long a total of N42m hit his GTB account from the NAF account making a total of N134m.

    “When he was handing over the property Alex Badeh told him to write a tenancy agreement between Platinum Universal Construction Company as the landlord and Alex Badeh Jnr as the tenant.

    “He then handed over the key to Bdeh. Before he drew the tenancy agreement, Alex Badeh Jnr requested the original certificate of occupancy to him – Certificates of Occupancy.”

    Badeh and his company, Iyalikam Nigeria Limited are standing trial on a 10-count charge of money laundering, in which they are accused of  fraudulent diversion of N3.9bn belonging to the Nigerian Air Force.

    They were said to have used the money to buy landed assets in choice areas of Abuja and Badeh’s home state, Adamawa State.

    The trial resumes Wednesday.

     

  • Saraki’s trial at CCT: Prosecution closes case after calling five witnesses

    Saraki’s trial at CCT: Prosecution closes case after calling five witnesses

    The prosecution, in Senate President, Bukola Saraki’s trial for false asset declaration before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), closed its case on Thursday after calling five witnesses.

    Lead prosecuting lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) announced the closure of the prosecution’s case after its fifth witness, Bayo Dauda, a bank official concluded his testimony at yesterday’s proceedings.

    Led in evidence by Jacobs, Dauda told the tribunal that Saraki obtained loans from GTB three times between 2006 and 2010. He said Saraki got the first loan of N380m in October 2006, the second of N380m on January 30, 2007 and the third, of N375m on February 10, 2010.

    Jacobs, who said Dauda was subpoenaed, tendered a copy of subpoena served on him and Saraki’s bank opening package before the tribunal, which it admitted as evidence.

    The witness said he was Saraki’s account officer. He said Saraki, as Kwara State governor-elect, opened the account with the bank in April 2003.

    Dauda, who read from a bundle of bank documents earlier tendered by the prosecution as exhibits, said Saraki got the second loan of N380m for the purpose of buying property in London, the United Kingdom.

    He said Saraki used part of the loans to buy properties at 17A and B Mcdonald Street, Ikoyi and for purchase of property in London.

    “There were three loans offered to the defendant. The first one was N380m granted on October 11, 2006. The next one was N380m granted o January 30, 2007. The third one was N375m granted on February 10, 2010.

    “On October 16, 2006 there was a credit of N380m loan to the customer. It was utilised by issuance of various drafts to purchase properties. The drafts were in favour of the Implementation Committee of the Federal Government Landed Properties.

    “On February 5, 2007 there was a loan disbursement of N380m. Another draft of N180,675,000 was issued to Committee on Implementation Federal Government’s Landed Properties,” he said.

    Dauda, who read from a document marked Exhibit 48, which was a document showing the terms of repayment of the second loan of N380m, said, “the terms of repayment was five equal quarterly instalments of N76m plus interest accrued.

    “From the statement of account, the first quarter repayment was on May 2, 2007 and the amount was N81,309,589. As of July 29, 2007, he had paid (principal and interest) total sum of N81,309,589. N76m represented the quarterly principal repayment, while the remaining was the interest,” he said.

    The witness added that by June 29, 2007 the sum of N63,740,637.85 had accrued on Saraki’s account as “part of interest capitalised on the loan.”

    He said as of the time, there was still an outstanding part of the principal loan yet to be repaid by Saraki.

    When asked how Saraki repaid the loans, Daudu said, “The loans were repayment via cash lodgement, cheque deposits, transfers and different warrants from his shares were paid into the account.”

    When asked to produce Saraki’s transfer instructions and other documents relating to foreign transfers, the witness said: “We have not been able to find them. We checked everywhere, but we cannot find them. We even went to our archive in Akure, we could not find them.”

    While being cross-examined by Saraki’s lawyer, Dauda admitted that he originally understood the funds transferred abroad were for the purpose of purchasing property, but only realised from the documents shown to him in the witness box that the transfers were for “mortgage redemption”.

    He agreed that there was no legal limit to what a customer could deposit in his or her account, but that he only meant to say that some of the cash lodgements made by Sarak were above the threshold, which the bank was under obligation to report to relevant authority.

    The prosecution’s case aginst Saraki include breaches of asset declaration, to the effect that he, while being a public officer, operated bank accounts outside Nigeria, and failed to declare the foreign accounts to the Code of Conduct Bureau while being governor and a senator during the period.

    Saraki is also accused of failing to declare the sum loan which he allegedly obtained from GTB while still a state governor, and that he allegedly transferred the £1,516,194.53, which was then an equivalent of one of the loans, to his account with Fortis Bank, London, for the purchase of an “undisclosed property” in London.

    At the conclusion of Dauda’s testimony, Jacobs informed the tribunal that the prosecution was done with its case.

    Asked when the defence intends to open its case, a lawyer in the defence team, Paul Erokoro (SAN) said the defence will file a no-case submission. He said his team intends to first, file a formal application, requesting the tribunal’s record of proceedings before the filing of the no-case submission.

    CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar, then directed the tribunal’s Registry to put the records of proceedings together within two weeks. He asked the defence to file its written address in support of the no-case submission within one week, while the prosecution is to respond within one week after being served.

    He adjourned to June 8 for the adoption of the no-case submission.

  • CCT: Prosecution to call Saraki’s account officer as witness

    CCT: Prosecution to call Saraki’s account officer as witness

    …Tenders Senate President’s statement

     

    The prosecution in the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki said Thursday that it planned to call the officer in charge of Saraki’s accounts with Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB) Plc as its next witness.

    Saraki is being tried before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) for alleged false assets declaration.

    Lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs ‎(SAN) disclosed this at the resumption of proceedings yesterday after the prosecution tendered a statement said to be made by Saraki.

    The statement was said to have been made to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in 2013.

    The statement dated August 12, 2013, was tendered by the prosecution through its fourth witness, Alvan Gurummaal, a detective of the EFCC.

    He was subpoenaed to produce the statement before the tribunal as he was said to be a party to the investigation of the case.

    The content of the statement was not disclosed during proceedings.

    Saraki has consistently claimed that he was not allowed to respond to the discrepancies notice in his assets declaration forms before the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) referred him to the CCT for prosecution.

    After the witness tendered the statement, which was admitted by the tribunal, Jacobs said he could not continue because his nest witness was not available.

    Jacobs said the next witness,  who is Saraki’s account officer at the Guaranty Trust Bank Plc, informed him that he(the witness) would be absent from the day’s proceedings because he has a medical appointment to undergo surgery.

    He applied for an adjournment to a later date to enable him produce the 5th prosecution witness. He was silent of the proposed witness’ name.

    Tribunal’s Chairman, Danladi Umar, acceded to Jacobs’ request for adjournment in the absence of opposition from the defence team.

    He adjourn May 4 for continuation of trial.

  • ‘Saraki wrong to earn double salaries as public officer’

    ‘Saraki wrong to earn double salaries as public officer’

    An official of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), Samuel Madojemu on Thursday insisted that Senate President, Bukola Saraki was wrong to have earned monthly payments from the Kwara State governor at the same time when he was already elected to the Senate. 

    Madojemu, who is the Head, Intelligence Unit of the CCB was emphatic when he said:  “A public officer is not permitted to earn two salaries from public treasuries, using two government positions at the same time.” 

    The CCB official spoke while testifying as the third prosecution witness at the resumption of proceedings in Saraki’s trial before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) on charges of false assets declaration.

    Led in evidence by lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), Madojemu also said Saraki failed to declare, among others, his mortgage and the property he acquired through mortgage in London. He added that Saraki failed to declare his liability of about $3.4m in an America Express Card.

    “Your lordship, a public officer who has a mortgage abroad is expected to declare the mortgage. Having fully paid the mortgage, the public officer is expected to declare the property in his asset declaration form. But the defendant did not declare any mortgage in London.

    “He (Saraki) gave instruction to his banker, the GTB, to transfer £1,516,000 in two days to a bank in Fortis Bank for a mortgage in London. There was no declaration for the property in London.”

    Madojemu also said the Senate President made a single deposit of N77m cash on September 5, 2007, when his monthly salary, as governor of Kwara State, was N254,412.25.

    The witness, who read from a statement of Saraki’s account with the Guaranty Trust Bank Plc, said the N77m was deposited in the defendant’s account in one day.

    “Your lordship, the cash lodgment deposited is not consonant with the income of the defendant as a governor. It cannot be attributable to his legitimate income. Your lordship, the defendant was earning 254,412.25 for a month. 

    “Within that same period, in one single day, as shown in the statement of account made available by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), there was lodgment of N77m in his account in one day.

    “From Exhibit 15, the salary of governors as of August 12, 2007, was N254,412.25.”

    On his role in the investigation of Saraki’s case, the witness said: “My role with reference to the exhibits mentioned already, was to compare the exhibits with the asset declaration forms of the defendants to see if there was any infraction with regards to his declarations.Those exhibits were sourced by EFCC officials in my team.”

    Under cross-examination by the defence lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), Madojemu was shown the contradiction in the number of Saraki’s asset declaration forms that the prosecution had tendered in court and the number of the forms which the CCB official had linked to Saraki in an affidavit.

    While seven of Saraki’s declaration forms had been tendered before the CCT, Madojemu had stated in the affidavit that Saraki had only declared four.

    When asked by the defence lawyer if four and seven were the same, the witness said no.

    Responding to further questions, the witness confirmed that he had earlier stated that it was unlawful for a public officer to trade in rice and sugar commodities.

    The witness said a public officer was permitted to own shares in companies, and when asked further, he said nothing stopped such public officers from owning shares in companies trading in rice and sugar.

    He confirmed that he never met Saraki in person and never asked him if he had shares in any company trading in rice and sugar.

    Madojemu said: “Public officer is allowed to own shares in a company. Nothing to my knowledge stops a public officer from owning controlling shares in a limited liability company. A public officer can be allowed to own controlling shares in a company that trades in rice and sugar. 

    “I did not ask the defendant whether he had shares in the company that traded rice and sugar. I did not find out if any of the companies in which the defendant owns share trades in rice and sugar. I have never seen the audited account of the defendant’s companies,” the witness said.

    Earlier, Saraki was re-arraigned on an amended 18-count charge filed by the prosecution, t which he pleaded not guilty.

    Saraki is, in the amended charge, accused of failing to make a written declaration of his “properties and assets”, that is, N77m paid into his account with Guaranty Trust Bank, GRA, Ilorin branch on September 5, 2007.

    It was also alleged that the sum of N77m was “not fairly attributable” to Saraki’s “income, gifts or loan approved by the Code of Conduct for Public Officers”.

    Further hearing in the case is adjourned to March 2.