The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Rotimi Jacobs (SAN)

  • Badeh: Court adjourns trial to January 12

    Badeh: Court adjourns trial to January 12

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, has adjourned the case of a former Chief of Defence Staff, Alex Badeh, till January 12.

    The judge, Justice Okon Abang, adjourned the matter when the prosecution presented the 13th witness, Joseph Okpetu, on Tuesday.

    The Prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), led Okpetu, a contractor, in his evidence-in-chief.

    Okpetu told the court that he knew Badeh in 2003 when he did the renovation in Zone D Apo, Abuja, and also in 2008 when he did a construction for Nigeria Airforce in Kaduna.

    He said when the defendant was appointed as the Chief of Air Staff in 2012, he was not in the country but when he returned, he went to his house and there he met with Yishau the director of finance.

    He said after some months, Yishau called him and handed him a building plan to be constructed for Badeh in Yola and was given N100 million, which he refused before it was increased to N150 million.

    “The construction in Yola was for three bedroom duplex, with a guest room and a boy’s quarters.

    “The construction was completed in 2014, I don’t know if the house was occupied, but I told Yusau that we completed it, that is when he paid me the balance of the contract after completion,” he said.

    When asked if he knew anything about the renovation Badeh’s house in the village, he said yes.

    “I got a call by an unknown person and was asked if I was the one that built the house in the village for Badeh, I said yes, the person then said how much will it cost to renovate the house.

    “I told him when it was built it was around N15 million to N19 million then, so, I told him it will cost N50 million and I was given the money.

    “I also did some work on his farm with part of the N50 million, that is the access road to the farm, we use the money to buy plants and equipment,” Okpetu added.

    He further said that the total amount spent on the farm was about seven million naira and he refunded N20 million to Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) as balance he had after deducting administrative charges of his company and other expenses.

  • 14 days after, Saraki ends historic cross-examination

    14 days after, Saraki ends historic cross-examination

    After engaging the first prosecution witness in his trial for 14 days, Senate President, Bukola Saraki ended his cross-examination of Michael Wetkas on Tuesday.
    Saraki is being prosecuted on a 16-count charge of false assets declaration before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).
    Since the prosecution team led by Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) concluded with Wetkas (an operative of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission)  as its first prosecution witness about five months ago, the defence has been cross-examining him.
    At some points, the tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar and Jacobs had had cause to complain about the seeming unending cross-examination by the defence team, with lawyers in the team, including Paul Usoro (SAN) and Paul Erokoro (SAN) taking a turn to ask the witness questions.
    Many were, however, surprised when Usoro announced that the defence was through with Wetkas because he (Usoro) did not give any hint the previous day that he would be done with the witness yesterday.
    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, Usoro queried the witness in relation to count-16 of the charge.
    The count relates to an allegation that the Senate President between, June 2011 and October 2013, took salaries and emoluments from Kwara State Government and at the same time from the Federal Government as a Senator in breach of section 6(a) of Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act.
    When asked if he investigated the account of the Kwara State Government, and whether he questioned Saraki or any officials of the state government about the charge, Wetkas said “no.”
    At the completion of the defence’s cross-examination, Usoro thanked the tribunal for accommodating the defence, notion that the long cross-examination was not meant to delay the case but was because the case is complex.
    Jacobs was absent at yesterday’s proceedings. The tribunal adjourned further hearing to January 11 next year.
  • EFCC excludes Diezani, Aluko from $1.6b charge against ex-NNPC directors

    EFCC excludes Diezani, Aluko from $1.6b charge against ex-NNPC directors

    *Court grants N50m bail each to Omokore, others

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) made last minute adjustment to a $1.6billion charge it filed against associates of former Petroleum Resources Minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke.

    The commission applied for the exclusion of the names of the former minister and a businessman, Kolawole Akanni Aluko, who were mention in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/121/2016.

    Alison-Madueke (said to be at large)  was named in count 8 of the charge  and accused of “abetting the commission of money laundering,” by the those listed as defendants in the charge.

    Aluko (also said to be at larage) was accused of engaging in conspiracy and money laundering and fraud.

    The EFCC’s decision to exclude Alison-Madueke and Aluko from the charge was informed by the insistence of the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako that it was impossible to proceed with the arrangement yesterday when the ex-minister and Aluko were not in court and had not been served with the charge.

    Although prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) argued that the arraignment could be done without Alison-Madueke and Aluko, who were merely mentioned in the charge, but not as defendants, the judge insisted that both names must either be excluded or they be served with the charge and produce in court before arraignment could take place.

    Shortly after Jacobs applied for the exclusion of the names of the ex-minister and Aluko from the charge, the judge directed tha the charge be read to the defendants.

    Those arraigned were businessman, Jide Omokore, former Managing Director of the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company Limited (NPDC), Victor Briggs, Abiye Membere, former Group Executive Director, Exploration and Production of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Abiye Membere, Manager, Planning and Commercial of the NNPC, David Mbanefo and twocompanies linked with Omokore – Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concepts Limited.

    They were arraigned on a nine-count charge and accused of obtaining under false pretence and engaging in money laundering estimated at about $1,646,140,379.90.

    Omokore was alleged to have used the Strategic Alliance Agreement signed between the NPDC and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Limited to swindle the NPDC and the Nigerian government of monies running into billions of dollars through the lifting of crude oil from some oil wells between March 2013 and May 2014.

    The other accused persons who were senior management staff of the NNPC are accused of conspiracy in inducing the NPDC to facilitate the lifting of crude by Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited  and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Limited.

    “They were also accused receiving car gifts from Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Limited.

    They pleaded not guilty to the charge when it was read to them.

    Following their plea of not guilty, Based on their plea, Jacobs, SAN, asked the court for a date for the commencement of trial.

    Following an application from the defence team, Justice Nyako granted bail to the defendants at N50million each with a surety.

    The judge said such surety must either be a director in the federal Civil Service or must have a landed property in the jurisdiction of the court.

    She adjourned to October 19 for the commencement of trial

    Part of the charge reads:

    *That you Olajide Jones Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd and Kolawole Akanni Aluko (now at large) between May and October 2013 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, by false pretence and with intent to defraud, induced the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and the Federal Government of Nigeria to deliver to you 5,652,227 barrels of crude oil (Brass blend) valued at the sum of US$616,013,615.27 (six hundred and sixteen million, thirteen thousand, six hundred and fifteen US dollars, twenty seven cents) through the medium of a contract (Strategic Alliance Agreement), which delivery was induced by false pretence to wit: the representation that you had technical competence, professional skills and funds (both local and foreign) necessary to support NPDC in petroleum operation for the OML 60, 61, 62 and 63 and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1(1)(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act Cap A6, 2010 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

    *That you Olajide Jones Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd between January and March 2014 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court! By false pretence. And with the intent to defraud, induced the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and the Federal Government of Nigeria to deliver to you 1,899,640 barrels of crude oil (Brass blend) valued at the sum of US$207,061,574.68 (two hundred and seven million, sixty one thousand, five hundred and seventy four UD dollars. And sixty eight cents) through the medium of a contract (Strategic Alliance Agreement) which delivery was induced by false pretence, to wit: the representation that you had technical competence, professional skills and funds (both local and foreign) necessary to support NPDC in petroleum operation for the OML 60,61, 62 and 63 and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1(1)(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act Cap. A6, 2010 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

    *That you Olajide Jones Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd between May2013 and March 2014 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, obtained by false pretence and with the intent to defraud 7,551,867 barrels of crude oil (Brass crude) valued at the sum of US$823,075,189.95 (eight hundred and twenty three million, seventy five thousand, one hundred and eighty nine US dollars and ninety five cents) from Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and the Federal Government of Nigeria on false pretence that you had funds (both local and foreign) necessary to support the NPDC Limited in petroleum. Operation for the OML 60, 61, 62 and 63 and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act Cap A6, 2010 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

    *That you Olajide Jones Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd, Victor, Abiye Membere and David Mbanefo between 2013 and 2014 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, did conspire amongst yourselves to commit an offence to wit: obtaining property by false pretence by inciting the Nigeria Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). And the Federal Government of Nigeria to deliver to Olajide Jones Omokore, Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd and Kolawole Akanni Aluko (now at large) 7,551,867 barrels of crude oil (Brass blend) in total, valued at the sum of US$823,075,189.95 (eight hundred and twenty three million, seventy five thousand, one hundred and eighty nine dollars and ninety five cents) and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 8 (a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act Cap A6, 2010 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

    *That you Olajide Jones Omokore,  Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited and Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd sometime in 2013 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, did conspire amongst yourselves to commit an offence, to wit: laundering of proceeds of an unlawful act and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 as amended in 2012 and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.

    * That you Olajide Jones Omokore,  Atlantic Energy Brass Development Limited, Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd and Kolawole Akanni Aluko) now at large) sometime in May and October 2013 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, did convert 5,652,22 barrels of crude oil (Brass blend) into the sum of US$616,013,615.23 (six hundred and sixteen million, thirteen thousand, six hundred and fifteen US dolars, twenty seven cents) which you reasonably ought to have known formed part of the proceeds of an unlawful act (to wit: stealing of the said crude oil) of Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Ltd and Atlantic Energy Brass Development Ltd and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15(2) (b) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 as amended in 2012 and punishable under section 15 (3) of the same Act.

  • ‘Saraki’s allegation of bias against CCT, a desperate move to frustrate trial’ – Prosecution

    ‘Saraki’s allegation of bias against CCT, a desperate move to frustrate trial’ – Prosecution

    …Tribunal to rule July 13

    The prosecution in the false asset declaration trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) said yesterday that a fresh application by Saraki, asking the tribunal Chairman to disqualify himself from the case on ground of alleged bias was a desperate move to frustrate his trial.

    Lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) cautioned the tribunal against granting application on the ground that it was intended by Saraki and his legal team to “obtain from the backdoor, what they failed  to achieved at the Supreme Court,” in reference to the February 5 judgment of the apex court which dismissed Saraki’s appeal against his trial.

    “They know that this tribunal has only two members, and if the Chairman recuse himself from this trial, the tribunal will stop sitting. What they failed to achieve through their appeal, they now want it through the back door,” Jacobs further said.

    Jacobs was reacting to the application by Saraki Saraki, alleging that a comment made by  the tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar during the proceedings of June 7,  in which he expressed his displeasure  at the defence’ delay tactics and warned that the delay would not reduce the consequences that awaits the defendant at the end of trial.

    Arguing the application earlier, a member of Saraki’s legal team, Paul Erokoro (SAN) argued that the implicit meaning of the tribunal Chairman’s comment was that the delay will not reduce the severity of his client’s punishment, which he said implied that Umar had concluded in his mind that Saraki would be convicted at the end of the trial.

    Erokoro argued that by his statement, Umar has betrayed his inability guarantee fair hearing to Saraki in line with the provision of Section 36(1) of the Constitution.

    The lawyer said: “Our chairman will no longer be able to comply with section 36(1) of the Constitution in this trial and that is the point we are making. The fundamental point is that once it is no longer possible for the chairman of the tribunal to be fair to both sides, he has to recuse himself.

    “We are saying that once a judge, by word or action, can no longer hold the scale of justice, the judge should withdraw. The prosecution has not disputed the fact that the chairman made this statement. For the avoidance of doubt, the prosecution has implicitly admitted that the Chairman made that statement.”

    Erokoro, who referred to the reports of the June 7 proceedings in seven newspapers, quoting the Umar  as making the statement, also referred to affidavits of “four concerned Nigerians” who were at the June 7 proceedings, allegedly confirming  that the chairman made the statement and reaching conclusion that he (Umar) could never be fair to Saraki, were filed as exhibits.

    He identified the deponents to the affidavits as Abubakar Shehu Mahmud, Ogbonna Emanuel Azuke, Omokanye David Adetoyese and Nasir Suberu.

    Erokoro said: “The prosecution has said in their counter-affidavit that the chairman assured the defence on June 7 that he would keep his mind open and do justice. No counter-affidavit has said that the tribunal chairman said so. If indeed the chairman said so, it is another reason to be afraid. Why did the chairman have cause to re-assure the defence?

    “No reasonable person, who listened to the Chairman would not conclude that the chairman had made up his mind,” Erokoro siad.

    Responding, Jacobs faulted the application, arguing that the applicant failed to attach certified record of proceedings, which he is complaining against. He noted that it was only intended by the defence to further stall proceedings or at best ensure further delay.

    He noted that Saraki had in the past filed similar application, which the tribunal refused, and which now forms the subject of an appeal before the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

    Jacobs argued Saraki and his lawyers were interpreting the tribunal’s Chairman’s statement to suit their interest.

    “The chairman said the consequences of trial, which is either conviction or acquittal. Sections 309 and 310 of the Adminiatration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) are clear on what the consequences of trial are. The consequences of trial is the end/conclusion, which can go either way.

    “The Chairman did not use the words consequences of the ‘offence’ or ‘conviction,’ which would have implied that the Chairman had concluded that he will convict the defendant. The Chairman used the word ‘trial.’

    “Your lordship is eminently qualified to continue with this trial.  Their application is based on false premise and misunderstanding of that word. Every trial has its own consequence, which is conclusion.  This is an attempt to further delay trial. Their conclusion is mere conjecture,” Jacobs siad.

    Citing a Supreme Court decision, Jacobs  described the four affidavits of concern by the four persons attached to the defendant’s motion as extraneous and deposed to by “rash persons”.

    Jacobs argued that the affidavits were mere opinions of some individual,s who were seeking political patronage from the defendant, and were not the reasonable common man who had the full knowledge of the case as envisaged by law.

    “The affidavits deposed to by the four persons were deposed to by supporters of the defendant. A motion must be supported by an affidavit. Extraneous affidavits such as these are unknown to law. The deponents are obviously supporters of the defendant. They have their interest to serve, and they went to the counsel for the defendant telling him they want to depose to an affidavit of concern.

    “Those people are rash persons. Rash! Rash! Rash! The affidavits are opinion of those who do not have full knowledge of the case. They are people who will sit in the gallery seeking political patronage. They just hold on to one word and say the judge is bias.  They are not the reasonable common man,” Jacobs said.

    He argued that the statement made by the Chairman was justified based on the antecedence of the defence, who has spent 12 days cross-examining the first prosecution witness and was yet to conclude.

    Jacobs further argued that even if the tribunal chairman made the statement, it did not imply a threat of conviction, as the “consequence” mentioned in the comment implied the two possible outcomes of a trial.

    “What the tribunal Chairman said was an expression of his determination to see the trial to the end despite the delay tactics of the defence. He simply said the defendant will meet the consequence of the trial which could either be acquittal or conviction.

    “”What the tribunal said is I must conclude this trial; there must be an end to this trial. I must conclude this trial. His lordship did not express the opinion that I must convict you.  Your lordship will have to look at sections 309 and 310 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.

    “This application is based on false premise. There is a clear intention to delay. The decision of the tribunal cannot be based on conjecture. It cannot be based on an unreasonable application of affidavits of concern that replaced trial in the statement of the chairman with offence,” Jacobs said and urged the tribunal to dismiss the application.

    Tribunal Chairman, Umar adjourned to July 13 for  ruling.

     

     

     

  • Again, prosecution’s absence stalls Dokpesi’s trial

    Again, prosecution’s absence stalls Dokpesi’s trial

    For the second time on two consecutive dates, proceedings were again stalled Wednesday before the Federal High Court, Abuja in the trial of businessman, Raymond Dokpesi owing to the absence of the prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN).

    Jacobs did not send any of his juniors, but instead, he sent a letter to the court, seeking an adjournment to the next day, a request the defence legal team led by Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN) rejected.

    A similar incident occurred when the case last came up on April 28.

    Jacobs, who was then engaged in the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), equally wrote to the court and sought a new date, following which the trial judge, Justice John Tsoho adjourned to June 15.

    When the case was called Wednesday, Dokpesi, dressed in all white outfit, stepped into the dock, following which Adedipe announced a long list of lawyers, including Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and Dayo Akinlaja (SAN) for the defence.

    Justice Tsoho later asked Adedipe if he was aware of a letter written by the prosecution, requesting for an adjournment.

    Adedipe said Wole Olanipekun (SAN), who is leading the defence team told him about it.

    He later sought for a date in late October or early November to enable everybody settle down after the court’s forthcoming vacation and the International Bar Association (IBA) conference.

    He added that Dokpesi just return from a medical trip abroad and would be returning in 0ctober, which also informed his request for either late October or early November.

    When asked by the judge if he was aware that the prosecution suggested tomorrow, Adedipe said Olanipekun, who came to Abuja for the case on Tuesday, has returned to Lagos and would not be returning soon.

    Adedipe also told the court that when he called the prosecution lawyer yesterday, Jacobs could not confirm whether trial will commence in the case.

    He said Olanipekun requested for a fairly long date and that the defendant’s health was also an issue.

    Justice Tsoho adjourned to October 19 for the commencement of trial.

    Dokpesi and his firm, Daar Holding and Investment Limited were arraigned before Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja on February 17 on a six-count charge bordering on alleged procurement fraud and breach of public trust to the tune of N2.1 billion.

    They were said to have received N2.1billion from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) between October 2014 and March 2015, which diverted to fund the presidential campaign of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), an act said to be a breach of provisions of the Public Procurement Act, Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act.

    Jacobs is simultaneously prosecuting no fewer than eight cases cases on behalf of the Federa Government. His presence in one, in most instances, affects proceedings in the others, which are mostly slated for the same day.

    His absence in the Dokpesi case Wednesday was as a result of his engagement in the hearing of two appeals by Dasuki, before the Court of Appeal, Abuja division, which took place simultaneously with Dokpesi’s trial yesterday morning.

    His presence at the Court of Appeal Wednesday also stalled proceedings in the case involving ex-National Security Aviser (NSA), Smabo  Dasuki before Justice Husein Baba Yusuf, where he also wrote for adjournment.

    Jacobs is currently involved in the two cases involving Dasuki before Justices Baba-Yusuf and Peter Afen of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Maitama, Abuja and the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    He is also involved in the trial of former Head of Service of the Federation (HOSF), Steve Oronsaye before Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja; The trial of ex-Chief of Defence Staff, Alex Badeh and trials of former governors of Abia, Plateau and Taraba states – Orji Kalu, Joshua Dariye and Jolly Nyame.

    While Kalu’s case is before Justice Anwuli Chikere of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Dariye and Nyame are being tried before Justice Adebukola Banjoko of the High Court of FCT in Gudu, Abuja.

  • CCT frowns at delay by Saraki’s lawyers

    CCT frowns at delay by Saraki’s lawyers

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has frowned at what it described as the delay tactics being employed by lawyers to Senate President, Bukola Saraki in his on-going trial for false asset declaration.

    Saraki’s legal team consisting of about 100 lawyers, including about 10 Senior Advocates, has spent 11 days on the cross-examination the first defence witness, Michael Wetkas, and was yet to conclude.

    The tribunal has also expressed discomfort over what it called incidents of misrepresentation of proceedings in the media.

    Tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar, who spoke at the resumption of proceedings Tuesday, said the tribunal was equally bothered by the concern expressed by the prosecution that the defence was deliberately delaying proceedings.

    At the commencement of proceedings, lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) complained that the defence was unduly delaying proceedings having spent 11 days cross-examining a single witness presented by the prosecution.

    Umar said: “I am not happy at the delay tactics by the defence counsel. And I must say this thing out, that this delay tactics will not reduce the consequences the defendant will meet from this tribunal at the end of the trial if he is found guilty.”

    Lead defence lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN) however told the tribunal that the defence team was not comfortable the tribunal Chairman’s view on the allegation of delay made by Jacobs.

    “From the defence side, we are not worried about the law and facts that will be placed before this tribunal by the prosecution. But we are worried about enemies, who may wish to use this tribunal to achieve their ulterior motive.

    “As the tribunal Chairman, we love you, we respect you, but we are afraid of consequences, especially as just stated by this tribunal this morning. Our fears have been reinforced, but we pray against consequences that are against natural justice,” Agabi said.

    On the issue of misrepresentation, Umar was particularly angered by some media reports to the effect that the tribunal had adjourned Saraki’s trial indefinitely.

    “Journalists should be punished” for publishing falsehood, “it is a criminal offence. If I have my way I would bring back Decree 2 of the olden days to take care of the irresponsible journalists in this country”.

    “How can they dare to publish that we have adjourned the trial of this defendant (Saraki) indefinitely? It is the highest point of irresponsible journalism. But I thank God for them that we are in a democratic era and that is why they are doing what they are doing now.

    “They are embarking on sensational journalism to sell their newspapers at the expense of truth. That is not journalism, but a serious crime that can lead them to jail,” Umar said.

    Agabi, who agreed with Umar on the need for the media to be accurate in their report of proceedings, said he admires journalists a lot, because of their contributions to the enthronement of democracy in the country.

    He said what Nigeria needed now was peace and not Decree 2. He urged Nigerians should pray for peace rather than anything that can disturb the peace of the nation.

    Another member of Saraki’s legal team, Paul Usoro (SAN) later cross-examined Wetkas.

    Under cross-examination, Wetkas insisted that Saraki procured undeclared properties through bank loans of over N2.5billion.

    When asked if he found any economic and financial infractions in the activities of Skyview properties limited (a company linked to Saraki), Wetkas said: “The only thing we found out during investigation is that, both Plots 2481 and 2481 Cadastral Zone, Maitama, Abuja were residential properties, and that loans were taken by Skyview from Guranty Trust Bank to develop the properties.

    “The loan was in two tranches of N1.8billion and over N700million. When we interview the Managing Director of Skyview, he said the transactions were at the instance of the defendant, and that the property belongs to the defendant, that formed our basis of the ownership,” Wetkas said.

    When asked if he ever confronted Saraki with their findings, Wetkas said he never did.

    At this point, tribunal Chairman indicated his intention to adjourn proceedings on the ground that tribunal members had an engagement outside the tribunal premises.

    Agabi and Usoro however sought a long adjournment. Agabi said he had written the tribunal about an appointment he has with his physicians.

    Usoro also said he was engaging on a trip to Ghana.

    The tribunal later adjourned to June 15 for continuation of trial.

  • Ex-Governor Kalu’s corruption trial reopens April 11

    Ex-Governor Kalu’s corruption trial reopens April 11

    •Supreme Court delivers judgment on March 18

    The Federal Government may reopen the trial of former Abia State Governor Orji Uzor Kalu on April 11.

    This followed a letter by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) to the Federal High Court, Abuja, for a fresh hearing in the case stalled since 2007 by appeals filed by Kalu.

    Following the letter, the court scheduled the case for mention yesterday.

    The ex-governor is challenging the money laundering charge brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Kalu was arraigned on July 27, 2007, at the Federal High Court, Abuja on a 107-count of money laundering, official corruption and criminal diversion of public funds in excess of N5 billion.

    He approached the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling of the Federal High Court that he had a case to answer.

    The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of merit and gave the anti-graft agency the nod to prosecute him, a decision he appealed at the Supreme Court.

    Yesterday, the prosecution was represented by Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) and the defence was not.

    But Jacobs told the court that parties were awaiting the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kalu’s appeal.

    “By March 18, the Supreme Court will give its judgment in the appeal by the defendant. We have been waiting since 2007, we can still wait for one month,” Jacobs said.

    He requested a date after March 18 for parties to report the apex court judgment.

    Justice Anwuli Chikere agreed with Jacobs on the need to await the decision of the Supreme Court and adjourned to April 11.