The Nation Newspaper

Tag: trial

  • N2.8bn Fraud: Trial of Ex-NBC Boss, Mba, Others Begin

    N2.8bn Fraud: Trial of Ex-NBC Boss, Mba, Others Begin

    The trial of former Director-General of the Nigerian Broadcasting Commission, NBC, Emeka Mba, who is facing a 15-count charge of money laundering and procurement fraud to the tune of N2.8billion commenced on Tuesday with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, presenting its first witness, John Ejim

    Mba is standing trial alongside a former Director of Finance of NBC, Patrick Areh; Basil Udotai (trading in the name and style of Technology Advisors) and Babatunde Amure (trading in name and style of Divine Partners) before Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    They were alleged to have at various times connived and transferred state funds to the tune of N2.9billion from the account of NBC through various proxies for personal gains.

    Mba was also alleged to have used his office as former DG to award contracts without following due procurement process.

    Ejim, an operative of EFCC, while being led in evidence by counsel to EFCC, Prince Ben Ikani, told the court that his investigation was an offshoot of a petition dated December 30, 2015, to the Presidency by one Okey Nwafor and copied to the Executive Chairman of the EFCC.

    “The petition alleged among others things: a diversion of proceeds of sale of 700Mhz of Spectrum to an account held by NBC in Zenith bank and that the amount diverted was illegally paid to 5 setup proxies and manufacturers under the digital switch platform”, he said.

    When Ikani sought to tender the document (copy of the petition) in evidence, Mba’s counsel, S. I. Ameh, SAN, objected, saying, “the witness cannot be examined on a document he did not make.”

    Also counsel to the second, third and fourth defendants  –  I. F Chude, P. Erukoro and Ikoro M. Ikoro respectively aligned themselves with the objection raised by Ameh, while Erukoro added that there was no evidence of stamp duty paid by the prosecution on the document as stipulated by law.

    Responding, Ikani noted that the witness, as an investigator, was only stating what led to the investigation and that in law, what matters is the relevance of the document tendered.

    In a bench ruling, Justice Kolawole overruled the objection saying, “the document sought to be tendered is relevant to the case” and admitted it as exhibit 1.

    Continuing, the PW1 said he invited the account officer as well as the compliance officer of Zenith bank who brought along the account opening documents in which it was discovered that Mba was a co-signatory to the account.

    “The documents revealed the deposit of a lump sum of N34.1billion and a transfer of N2.8billion from the said account to Technology Advisors.

    “We invited Emeka Mba and Patrick Areh to further interrogate them on the matter.”

    “I attended to Patrick Areh who volunteered his statement after I availed him a copy of the petition”, Ejim stated.

    Ikani sought to tender the document (2nd defendant’s statement) in evidence, but its admissibility was objected by Chude, who said that the statement was not voluntarily obtained.

    Justice Kolawole, thereafter, adjourned to March 8, 2017 for a trial-within-trial to determine the voluntariness of the statement.

  • UK okays Diezani’s trial for ‘money laundering’

    UK okays Diezani’s trial for ‘money laundering’

    Four others to face prosecution in June  

    EFCC takes more proof to London

    All is set for the trial of a former Minister of Petroleum Resources Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke, and four others  in London for alleged corrupt practices.

    The trial has been fixed for June and more evidence were hauled to the United Kingdom at the weekend.

    Part of the evidence are the proceedings of a Federal High Court in respect of the order of  final forfeiture of $153million allegedly traced to the ex-minister.

    It was also learnt that one of the suspects had been found at a hideout in London and placed under surveillance.

    There have been reports that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was negotiating with Mrs. Alison-Madueke. The EFCC yesterday said it was not engaged in any secret negotiation with her.

    According to a source in the anti-graft agency, who spoke in confidence with our correspondent, the agency is set  for the trial.

    The source said: “The UK investigators have gone far on the allegations against Diezani. From the records made available, the ex-minister and four others will face trial as from June.

    “We have taken more evidence to the UK, including all court records relating to the final forfeiture of $153million. We have a huge pile of documents.”

    Responding to a question, the source added: “In fact, one of the suspects on the radar of investigators has been located in London and he is under surveillance.” He declined to name the suspect.

    On the reported negotiation with the former minister, the source said: “There is no basis to negotiate with the ex-Minister in view of the overwhelming evidence at our disposal. You should ask yourself what purpose the negotiation will serve.

    “The EFCC is set for the trial of the ex-minister at home and abroad. It is curious to be talking of a curious negotiation with someone who has a prima facie case to answer.

    “The ex-minister has forfeited $153m; we have had far-reaching investigation on her involvement in the $115m poll bribery scandal; we have seized some of her choice properties and she has consistently maintained that she is ready for trial. So, what is the basis for negotiation when we have a good case?”

    The National Crime Agency (NCA) on October 2, 2015 arrested Mrs. Alison-Madueke and four others  for alleged bribery and corruption and money laundering.

    The former minister, whose movement has been restricted to the UK, remains under investigation.

    The NCA found some of the ex-minister’s brothers and other business partners complicit in the money laundering allegation. She was arrested with her brothers.

    Messrs Abiye Agama and Somye Agama are Mrs Alison-Madueke siblings who operate some UK-based businesses hurriedly shut them after the NCA and the EFCC searchlight became intense.

    The two brothers are directors of Hadley Petroleum Solutions Limited, a company the authorities believe was  used for money laundering. The other directors are Ugonna Madueke and Abu Fari.

    The company was registered in June 2013 in Manchester, but was dissolved less than two years later last  February without filing any account.

    Abiye, 33, a point man of the firm, is a computer engineer and manager. He was a director in 11 other companies. He resigned from seven of them.

    According to EFCC records, some of the assets  linked with Mrs. Alison-Madueke are:

    • A block of six units service apartments on Awolowo Road, Ikoyi
    • Six units terrace flats in Yaba, Lagos Mainland
    • Twin four-bedroom duplexes in Lekki Phase I
    • Two duplexes on Banana Island
    • A duplex in Asokoro District, Abuja
    • A mini-estate in Mabushi, Abuja
    • A set of 12 terrace duplexes at Omaremi Street  in Port Harcourt
    • Large expanse of land at Oniru, Victoria Island in Lagos
    • A multi-billion Naira estate in Yenagoa
    • Two apartments in Dubai marked as J5 Emirates Hills (30million Dirham) and  E146 Emirates Hills valued at 44million Dirham
    • A hotel in Port Harcourt under investigation
    • $37.5m mansion on Banana Island in Lagos.

    But Alison-Madueke had disputed some of the slush funds and assets  attributed to her including the $153million.

    She said: “I have up till now chosen to maintain my silence and not to respond to inaccurate press reporting. However, given the level of deliberate inaccuracies, I am now forced to respond because it is clear that the EFCC is taking advantage of my silence to try me by media and to convict me in the eyes of the public on false reports.”

    “First and foremost, whilst the reasons for my being out of the country are public knowledge, the principle of fair hearing demands that I should have been notified of formal charges if truly there was a prima facie evidence or indictment against my person linking me with the said issue, so as to ensure that I had adequate legal representation. This was never done.

    “I wish to state that I cannot forfeit what was never mine. I do not know the basis on which the EFCC has chosen to say that I am the owner of these funds as no evidence was provided to me before the order was obtained and they have not in fact served me with the order or, any evidence since they obtained it.

    “I do not therefore, understand how the EFCC can in the same breath say that the monies in question are mine. If they had evidence that the monies were mine then they would not /should not, have used the procedure which applies only to funds of unknown ownership. If indeed they used this particular legal procedure because they did not know who owned the monies, then how can they now be falsely attributing the ownership to me.

    “Let me re-state categorically as I have always maintained, for the record, I have not and will never steal money from or defraud the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    “ I am willing to respond to any charges brought against me that follow duly laid down procedures.”

  • $151m deposits: Bankers, civil servants to face trial

    $151m deposits: Bankers, civil servants to face trial

    EFCC gets go-ahead to seize Yakubu’s $9.772m, 74,000 pounds

    A LIST of suspects who will face trial over the $151million and N8billion found in fictitious bank accounts is in the works, The Nation learnt yesterday.
    On the “long” list are bankers and civil servants, Attorney-General of the Federation Mr. Abubakar Malami (SAN) said.
    He declined to name the suspects but stressed that the government is interested in knowing how the funds were sourced and lodged in the accounts.
    Malami, who spoke with our correspondent from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, said: “But investigation is in top gear and I will not want to jeopardise it by giving out names of those affected.”
    Pressed for more comments, Malami said: “I am not certain of the number now but it is huge because it involved a syndicate.
    “The culprits include civil servants and bank officials who all connived to stash away these recovered monies.”
    He stressed that “no businessman was implicated but the suspects, who are many, are mostly civil servants and bank officials”.
    Another government source said the suspects would be named in court when charges are preferred against them.
    But there were strong indications yesterday that a commercial bank had written the Federal Government, owning up to the lodgment of $136,676,600.51 in a fictitious account with it.
    The bank has promised to remit the slush funds into a dedicated account provided by the government.
    The government official, who pleaded not to be named because of “the sensitivity of the matter”, said: “Before the government released the fact-sheet on the recovery of $136,676,600.51, it got a letter of from a commercial bank owning up that the cash was wired into a fictitious account in one of its branches.
    “The bank also made a commitment to remit the seized cash to a dedicated account which has been provided by the Federal Government. We are expecting the refund from the bank any moment from now.
    “We have the required evidence from the bank with the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation(OAGF).”
    The government source spoke on the investigation, saying “it is almost completed”.
    He agreed that Nigerians were eager to know the suspects, but insisted that “we will release their names only after charges have been preferred against them in court”.
    Also yesterday, a Federal High Court sitting in Kano, presided over by  Justice Zainab B. Abubakar, ordered the forfeiture of the US$9,772,00 and  £74,000 by a former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC),  Mr. Andrew Yakubu, to the Federal Government.
    The order was sequel to an ex-parte application by the EFCC seeking an interim forfeiture of the recovered money to the Federal Government.
    A statement by the Head of Media and Publicity of EFCC, Mr. Wilson Uwujaren, said the ex parte application was moved by Salihu Sani, counsel to the applicant.
    The statement said: “In her ruling, Justice Zainab held that the sum of $9,772,000 and £74,000  which are now in the custody of the applicant (EFCC) are in the interim forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
    “On the 3rd day of February, 2017, operatives of the Commission had stormed a building belonging to the former NNPC boss and recovered a staggering sum of $9,772,000 and £74,000 stashed in a huge fire proof safe. On February 8, 2017, Yakubu reported to the Commission’s Kano Zonal Office where he admitted being the owner of both the house and the money recovered.
    “Yakubu is still in custody assisting the investigation.”
    The  Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed,  on Sunday said the “whistle-blower policy has started yielding fruit as it has so far led to the recovery of US$151 million and N8billion in looted funds”.
    He said: “The looted funds, which do not include the $9.772 million in cash allegedly owned by a former Group Managing Director of the NNPC (which was also a dividend of the whistle-blower policy), were recovered from just three sources through whistle-blowers who gave actionable information to the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation.
    “The biggest amount of $136,676,600.51 was recovered from an account in a commercial bank, where the money was kept under an apparently fake account name, followed by
    N7billion  and $15million from another person and  N1billion  from yet another.
    ‘’When we told Nigerians that there was a primitive and mindless looting of the national treasury under the last Administration, some people called us liars.
    “Well, the whistle-blower policy is barely two months old and Nigerians have started feeling its impact, seeing how a few people squirreled away public funds.
    “It is doubtful if any economy in the world will not feel the impact of such mind-boggling
    looting of the treasury as was experienced in Nigeria.
    ‘’Yet whatever has been recovered so far, including the $9.8million by the EFCC, is just a tip of the iceberg.”

  • Why govt fired lead prosecutor in Supreme Court Justice’s trial, by AGF

    Why govt fired lead prosecutor in Supreme Court Justice’s trial, by AGF

    The Federal Government said yesterday that it fired Charles Adeogun-Phillips, the lead prosecutor in the trial of Supreme Court’s Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, for alleged conflict of interests.

    This is contrary to the claim by the former prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC) that he withdrew.

    Adeogun-Phillips led the prosecution team until February 9 when he announced his withdrawal from the case. He was silent on what informed his decision.

    He was the leader of ‘Team 16’of the National Prosecution Coordination Committee (NPCC) saddled with the prosecution of the case involving Justice Ngwuta and three officials of the Supreme Court, including the Chief Registrar, Ahmed Gambo Saleh.

    Saleh, Muhammad Abdulrahman Sharif and Rilwanu Lawal (both officials of the Supreme Court’s Accounts Department) were charged with alleged diversion of about N2.2billion and acceptance of gratification from contractors engaged by the court.

    On February 7, the office of the AGF withdrew the nine-count charge, marked: CR/13/2016, filed against Saleh and others before the High Court of the Federal Capital territory (FCT) on November 3 last year. State’s lawyer, Mrs. Hajara Yusuf was silent on the reason behind the withdrawal.

    Subsequent media reports, quoting some sources close to Adeogun-Phillips, however attributed his sudden withdrawal from Justice Ngwuta’s trial to his disagreement with the office of the AGF over its decision to discontinue the trial of Saleh and others, which is believed to have involved the largest amount of money – N2.2b.

    But, the office of the AGF yesterday faulted such reports, claiming that the lawyer was sacked because he allegedly withheld information about his involvement in a case against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Salihu Isah, Media aide to the AGF, Abubakar Malami (SAN), said in a statement yesterday that it was wrong for the AGF to retain Adeogun-Phillips while he was representing a private interest against a government agency.

    Isah also faulted insinuation that the decision to discontinue Saleh and others’ trial had religious and ethnic undertone.

    He said the charge against the Supreme Court officials was withdrawn because Saleh had agreed to serve as prosecution witness in Justice Ngwuta’s trial, which resumes today.

    He said a letter disengaging Adeogun-Phillips sent to him on Februrary 6 was acknowledged on February 8.

    The letter partly reads: “Contrary to impressions given by Charles Adeogun-Philips, the lead prosecutor in the suit against Supreme Court judge, Justice Sylvester Nwali Ngwuta in various reports, suggesting that he withdrew from the case on his own volition, the National Prosecution Coordination Committee (NPCC) that engaged his services actually withdrew thefiat issued to him to prosecute the case over non-disclosure of conflict of interest and for other sundry reasons.

    “The reports in a section of the media last Friday that he left in protest due to last week Tuesday’s dropping of charges earlier instituted against the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, Ahmed Gambo Saleh and two other officials of the apex court, Muhammad Abdulrahman Sharif and Rilwanu Lawal which he is also handling for the Federal Government and withdrawn against his consent, cannot be relied upon.

    “The insinuation that the AGF withdrew the case against the three Supreme Court officials because they are Northerners is also unwarranted due to the fact that the dropping of the suit was done in good faith and in the context of plea bargaining to achieve greater goals in the prosecution of the other bigger cases that are ongoing against Justice Sylvester Ngwuta among others.

    “So, it is wicked and childish for anyone to allude undue colouration to an action taken in national interest and reduce it to a North/South thing with a view to confuse the discerning public.

    “This is not the first time such process will be entered into in law, especially so as the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 allows plea bargaining in line with national interest.

    “And as a precedence, there was a time in the history of this nation that the allegations against Sergeant Rogers who was accused of killing Kudirat Abiola were stepped down for him to be used to testify against Major Hamza Al-Mustapha in the case between him and the Lagos state government over the killing of the wife of the acclaimed winner of the 1992 presidential election, late Chief M.K.O Abiola.

    “It has now clearly shown that, either corruption is fighting back or simply that some people want to be mischievous and to hoodwink and divert the attention of Nigerians from the core issues at stake.

    “Charles Adeosun-Philips is handling a brief in an ongoing suit at the Federal High Court in Lagos against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which amounts to conflict of interest, which he failed to disclose when being engaged.

    “The suit in question involves a bank executive, who is alleged to have laundered  $40m on behalf of former Minister of Petroleum, Mrs. Diezani Allison-Madueke as part of the $153, 310, 000.00 she is alleged to have siphoned from the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).

    “The EFCC is currently prosecuting the case before the Honourable Justice Muslim Hassan of the Federal High Court, Lagos pursuant to Section 17 of the Advanced Fees Fraud and Other Related Offences Act No. 14 of 2006 as well as Section 44(2) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federation of Nigeria.

    “It would be recalled that the National Prosecution Coordination Committee (NPCC) chaired by the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) was inaugurated by Vice President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo on May 27, 2016 at the Presidential Villa.

    ”It is charged with assisting the Attorney-General of the Federation in the exercise of his prosecutorial powers under Section 150 and 174(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; especially as it involves high profile criminal cases,” he said.

    Isah, who is also the Head of Communication and Public Affairs at the NPCC, said information about Adeogun-Philips’ sack was conveyed to him vide a letter titled, ‘Withdrawal of your name as a member of Team 16 of the National Prosecution Team handling charges No. FHC/ABJ/C/232/16-FRN vs Sylvester N. Ngwuta’ dated 6th February, 2017 and signed by the Special Assistant to the President on Research and Special Projects, who doubles as the NPCC Secretary, Sylvester O. Imhanobe.

    He said Adeogun-Philips acknowledged receipt of the letter through an email message dated February 8 where, according to Isah, he said: “Your letter of 6 February 2017, is received with great relief. I wish you and/or your colleagues at the NPCC, success in the continued prosecution of your ‘high profile’ cases.  With my very best wishes.”

    Isah said, in view of its experience with the Adeogun-Phillips’ case, the NPCC “plans to carry out a critical surgery on the present composition of the entire prosecution team to weed out those with question marks around them, because they had been informed before hands that anyone found wanting would be eased out since it is a continuous process.

    “Meanwhile, the other members of Team 16 of the NPCC comprising Hajara Yusuf, Dr. M. Lawal Yusufari and Ibrahim Waru remain intact as only its leader is affected.”

  • Is Ofili-Ajumogobia on trial for jailing ex-NIMASA DG?

    These are indeed strange times. These are times when the rule of the thumb has become the normal. And nothing we know is as it should be. For the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), you cannot be sure what is right and what is not as they are determined by variables outside the reasoning of the law and common sense.

    In the fight against corruption embarked on by President Muhammadu Buhari-led Federal Government, it is difficult to understand the motive or even why the administration would choose not to maintain a standard understandable rule in the so-called fight. From targeting perceived enemies or opponents, the government has since moved to judges, organising sting operations and putting some people almost perpetually under lock and key.

    But I am still at a loss as to why the anti-corruption agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has put the duo of Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia and Godwin Obla (SAN) on trial. It really beats my imagination that the acting chairman of the EFCC, Ibrahim Magu, a lawyer could give his nod for such a charade to go on.

    Of course, the EFCC has filed a 30 count charge against the Federal High Court Judge and Godwin Obla, who until recently, a Counsel of the anti-graft agency. At the heart of the charge is the allegation that Obla offered Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia the sum of N5 million to pervert the course of justice in FHC/1/C/482C/10. Interestingly, the EFCC has included such other charges as corrupt enrichment, money laundering and conspiracy to fit into a regular pattern of all other cases before the courts so as to give the media and the general public enough to chew while the high drama lasts.

    However, it should be a cause of concern for all lovers of democracy as well as those who voted for the President to pause awhile and ponder why the government decided to prosecute Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia and Obla ostensibly for alleged bribery. Could the government truly be sure that it is doing this as part of its anti-corruption agenda?

    While the government wants us to believe that the trial is as been presented at the Federal High Court where the two suspects have been charged, I make bold to say that deductions from the courtroom point to a different direction.  Perhaps, some elucidation may be necessary. If indeed Obla bribed Ofili-Ajumogobia, it means the former had a case before the latter, the outcome of which was manipulated through the bribe to perpetrate injustice. Anything short of this is incongruous and does not stand to reason.

    It beats the imagination that the said senior advocate could be said to have offered bribe, ostensibly on behalf of the EFCC to have Omatseye jailed. Why would he have done that? Was it the EFCC that provided the said N5million? Why must monetary inducement come in before conviction could be secured? So many questions begging for answers.

    More importantly, if indeed Obla bribed Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia to have the ex-NIMASA DG jailed in case no FHC/1/C/482C/10, should the EFCC not be contented that a conviction, no matter how it was obtained, was the outcome of the case? Magu ought to be excited that despite alleged frustrations in the judicial process; at least his agency was able to get this case through. And in the same manner, Obla and Justice Ofili-Ajugomobia ought to be toasts of the anti-graft agency.

    Rather than get commendation for diligent prosecution, the EFCC decided to put the duo in the dock for alleged corruption, an action which undoubtedly deserves close scrutiny. Nigerians need to know why the tables suddenly turned against them.

    Already, there are suggestions that Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia has been put up for the guillotine mainly because of her blunt refusal to play ball in some high cases before her court. She is also said to have courted the wrath of the powers that be in Abuja when she let go a former Minister of Aviation, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode.  If this was not the case, I do not see what other motives government can proffer as explanation for its present cause of action. In any case, why would the EFCC present separate facts to the media during so called investigation from what it has taken to the court?

    Notwithstanding that the government would want us to believe otherwise, it has become obvious that the travail of Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia is not isolated. That it follows after an established pattern that has seen other judges and justices being put on trial for alleged corruption.

    Two Supreme Court judges namely Justices Sylvester Ngwuta and Inyang Okoro are today under investigation or being tried for corruption. Others are the suspended Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, Ilorin Division, Justice Mohammed Ladan Tsamiya, who was picked up in Sokoto; Justice Adeniyi Ademola (Federal High Court); the Chief Judge of Enugu State, Justice I. A. Umezulike;  Justice Kabiru Auta of Kano State High Court;  Justice Muazu Pindiga (Gombe State High Court);  Justice Bashir Sukola and  Justice Ladan Manir from the Kaduna State High Court.

    Plausible as the trial of the judges may seem, it is more than a coincidence that almost all of them had at various times in the past dished out judgements against the APC. Those who did not fall into this category had earlier been indicted by the National Judicial Commission (NJC) and recommended for prosecution, making the action of government a somewhat overkill.

    Sadly, the Buhari’s government has often gone after straws and haystacks in the fight against corruption. Media trial and self-help, including the use of brute force and outright intimidation have become indices and standard gauge for measuring all it has done so far. You don’t have to look far to see this negative imprints in the activities of the EFCC, department of State Security Services (SSS), Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), etc.

    Yet, the administration seem unperturbed by the myriad of criticisms against the style adopted so far in the fight against corruption, daily losing credibility and the support of millions who voted for it in 2015. Neither is it bothered that even the international community has taken note of its approach and tokenism in a critical sector where transparency and absence of bias should be the abiding mantra.

    If only President Buhari and the anti-corruption agencies are aware of the consequences of their actions.

     

    • Garba, a Public Affairs analyst writes from Gusau.
  • Court adjourns trial of MCSN, officers

    Court adjourns trial of MCSN, officers

    A Federal High Court Judge sitting in Lagos, Mrs. Olateregun-Ishola, has adjourned the trials of Musical Copyright Society of Nigeria (MCSN), its CEO, Mr. Mayo Ayilaran and six other officers of the society, accused of operating an illegal copyright collecting society, to March 28 and 29, 2017.

    The trials which are in three separate cases, earlier slated for Monday, January 30, 2017 were rescheduled due to the absence of an MCSN staff, Miss Gladys Njoku, in court.

    The prison authorities failed to bring Njoku to court, who, along two others; Mr. Halim Mohammed and Mr. Olukayode Ajayi, have remained in remand due to their inability to perfect their bail conditions since October 26, 2016 when they were granted bail by the court.

    Other officers of the society who were in court include, MCSN’s CEO, Mr. Mayo Ayilaran, his deputy, Mr. Louis Bassey Udoh and two other officers of the organisation, Miss Omolari Banjo and Mr. Yusuf Benson.

    When the case was called on Monday, January 30, Defence counsel Mr. Wale Adesokan SAN sought to move an application for an order directing the Nigerian Copyright Commission to release the equipment, files, documents and all materials seized from the MCSN office during an NCC raid in 2012, in accordance with the earlier judgment of Justice Mohammed Yunusa delivered on March 18, 2013.

    According to Mr. Adesokan, the materials were required for the defense of the defendants. But the prosecution team objected, saying that the judgement of Justice Mohammed Yunusa had been completely set aside by the Court of Appeal in its unanimous judgment of October 19, 2016.

    Adesokan who reportedly expressed ignorance of the Court of Appeal judgment withdrew his application when handed a copy of the judgment.

    The Nigerian Copyright Commission had in FHC/IKJ/CR/18/2012, FHC/IKJ/CR/19/2012 and FHC/IKJ/CR/20/2012 brought three different cases against Musical Copyright Society Nigeria (MCSN) and seven of its accused officers for performing the duties of a collecting society without the approval of the Commission.

  • Court adjourns trial of MCSN, officers

    Court adjourns trial of MCSN, officers

    A Federal High Court Judge sitting in Lagos, Mrs. Olateregun-Ishola, has adjourned the trials of Musical Copyright Society of Nigeria (MCSN), its CEO, Mr. Mayo Ayilaran and six other officers of the society, accused of operating an illegal copyright collecting society, to March 28 and 29, 2017.
    The trials which are in three separate cases, earlier slated for Monday, January 30, 2017 were rescheduled due to the absence of an MCSN staff, Miss Gladys Njoku in court.
    The prison authorities failed to bring Njoku to court, who, along two others; Mr. Halim Mohammed and Mr. Olukayode Ajayi have remained in remand due to their inability to perfect their bail conditions since October 26, 2016 when they were granted bail by the court.
    Other officers of the society who were in court include, MCSN’s CEO, Mr. Mayo Ayilaran, his deputy, Mr. Louis Bassey Udoh and two other officers of the organization, Miss Omolari Banjo and Mr. Yusuf Benson.
    When the case was called on Monday, January 30, Defence counsel Mr. Wale Adesokan SAN sought to move an application for an order directing the Nigerian Copyright Commission to release the equipment, files, documents and all materials seized from the MCSN office during an NCC raid in 2012, in accordance with the earlier judgment of Justice Mohammed Yunusa delivered on March 18, 2013.
    According to Mr. Adesokan, the materials were required for the defense of the defendants. But the prosecution team objected, saying that the judgement of Justice Mohammed Yunusa had been completely set aside by the Court of Appeal in its unanimous judgment of October 19, 2016.
    Adesokan who reportedly expressed ignorance of the Court of Appeal judgment withdrew his application when handed a copy of the judgment.
    The Nigerian Copyright Commission had in FHC/IKJ/CR/18/2012, FHC/IKJ/CR/19/2012 and FHC/IKJ/CR/20/2012 brought three different cases against Musical Copyright Society Nigeria (MCSN) and seven of its accused officers for performing the duties of a collecting society without the approval of the Commission.

  • Trial of presidential committee member stalled

    Trial of presidential committee member stalled

    •Judge insists DSS must comply with bail order

    Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, yesterday declined a request by the state to begin trial in the case against a Presidential Committee member investigating procurement of arms and equipment in the Armed Forces, Air Commodore Umar Mohammed.
    The judge’s decision was informed by his realisation that the prosecution refused to comply with his earlier order admitting the defendant to bail.
    Mohammed, 54 years, was in late September, arraigned with his company – Easy Jet Integrated Services Limited – before Justice Tsoho on a four-count amended charge.
    The judge admitted Mohammed to bail and ordered, among others, that he should be remanded in prison custody until he met the bail conditions.
    At the resumption of proceedings yesterday, prosecution lawyer Labaran Magaji said the state was read to begin trial.
    But lead defence lawyer Hassan Liman (SAN) objected on the grounds that the court’s previous order was not complied with by the prosecution.
    He noted that his client, as against the order of the court, was still held by the Department of State Services (DSS) in its custody.
    Liman said the prosecution did not transfer the defendant to prison as ordered by the court and refused to release him even after he met the bail conditions, developments the prosecution did not deny.
    Upon being informed that the defendant was still in DSS’ custody, Justice Tsoho said he would not commence trial when his earlier orders had not been complied with.
    He said the prosecution should not be asking for trial when it was yet to comply with the court’s orders.
    The judge adjourned till December 19 for prosecution to comply with his order to release Mohammed after meeting the bail conditions.
    A similar incident played out before Justice Nnamdi Dimgba (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja) before who Mohammed and his company were earlier arraigned in July.
    Justice Dimgba admitted Umar to bail at N100 million, with two sureties at N50 million each, who could be a private citizen or public officer, with landed property in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
    Mohammed met the bail conditions, but the DSS refused to release him or transfer him to prison custody as ordered by the court.
    The judge, who was angered by the refusal of the DSS to comply with his orders, elected not to take any steps in the case until his orders were obeyed.
    The case remained stalled until it was re-assigned to Justice Tsoho’s court by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court.
    Mohammed and his company were charged with money laundering, illegal possession of firearms and violation of the Official Secret Act.
    They were said to have accepted $1,030,000 from a firm, Worldwide Consortium PTY Ltd “as payment for flight services without going through a financial institution as required by law”.
    They were said to have committed the offence of money laundering contrary to sections 18 (a) and 16(1) (d) of the Money Laundering Act 2011 and punishable under Section 16(2) (b) of the Act.
    Mohammed was accused of being in illegal possession of two pump action guns (marked: SBSG Magnum 397 and SBGS Interpress 09-1573) between June 1, 2011 and June 19, 2016 without valid licences and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 4 of the Firearms Act 2004 and punishable under Section 27(1)(b)(i) of the act.
    He was also accused of having in his possession, at his No. 4 Lungi Close, Mississippi, Maitama, Abuja, home, “classified/official documents without lawful authority and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1 (1) (b) of the Official Secret Act and punishable under Section 7 (1) (a) of the same Act.”

  • ‘Fight’ over fourth defendant stalls Oniba kidnap trial

    ‘Fight’ over fourth defendant stalls Oniba kidnap trial

    The trial of four suspects in the kidnap of the traditional ruler of Iba Town, Oba Goriola Oseni, failed to commence Friday following a disagreement between two counsel over which of them would represent fourth defendant, Yerin Fresh.

    Fresh was arraigned on October 24, before Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo of the Lagos State High Court, Igbosere, alongside first defendant Duba Furejo, second defendant Ododowo Isaiah and third defendant Reuben Anthony.

    They are standing trial on an eight-count charge bordering on conspiracy, murder, attempted murder, robbery, armed robbery, felony and kidnapping preferred against them by the Lagos State Government.

    On October 24, Fresh was represented by Chief Selowei Baidi, who is also the counsel to the first and second defendants, while Mr J. O Egwuaroje was the third defendant’s counsel.

    The defendants were remanded in Ikoyi Prison, Lagos following their plea of not guilty.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, Mrs E. I. Alakija, the Lagos State Director of Public Prosecution (DDP), announced her appearance for the state, while Baidi and Egwuaroje maintained appearances for the same defendants.

    But mild drama began when another lawyer, Mr Anthony Onwueze, also announced appearance for the fourth defendant, Fresh.

    Responding to a query from Justice Taiwo, Onwueze explained that he had been commissioned to represent the fourth defendant.

    “Prior to the court sitting, we approached Mr Baidi that we have a specific instruction from the fourth defendant to represent him in this matter. But Mr Baidi said his brief has not been perfected. We have a letter from the defendant authorising us to represent him,” Onwueze said.

    But Baidi confronted Onwueze with the Rules of Professional Ethics of the profession and insisted that Onwueze had not fulfilled the conditions precedent for over a brief from another lawyer.

    Baidi said: “I maintain my stand as the defence counsel for the fourth defendant. I am opposed to him taking over as counsel without compliance with Rule 29 of the Rules of Professional Ethics.”

    Following back and fourth arguments prosecution counsel Mrs Alakija observed that a dispute over proper representation in the case could be resolved in accordance with Section 234 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL), 2011, which provides for change of counsel.

    She offered that the prosecution was willing to give counsel time to settle the matter.

    “We can give counsel time to sort out the issue of representation before the next adjournment. We still have November 11 and 14 dates for trial,” Alakija said.

    Third defendant counsel, Egwuaroje also observed that the prosecution witnesses appeared to be absent.

    In a bench ruling, Justice Taiwo said: “Both counsel are hereby advised to abide by the professional rules. Mr Onwueze should assist Chief Baidi to recover whatever fees are due to him from the fourth defendant.

    “In view of the circumstances, I would suggest that we commence trial on October 11, by which time counsel would have put their house in order. This case is hereby adjourned till November 11. Witnesses must be in court. Counsel must have resolved the issue. No bickering gentlemen.”

    The defendants were arraigned on eight count charge bordering on conspiracy, murder, attempted murder, robbery, armed robbery , felony and kidnapping preferred against them by the Lagos State Government.

    They and others at large were accused of conspiring to commit the alleged offences on July 16, at the traditional ruler’s palace in Iba.

    Apart from the kidnap of Oba Yishau Goriola Oseni, they allegedly murdered ‎a security guard, Sunday Eniola Okanlawon and a commercial motorcyclist, Joseph Okeke and also attempted to murder the monarch’s wife, Olori Abosede Oseni.

    According to the charge, they also robbed Abosede of her mobile phone while armed with guns.

    The state said the offences contravened Sections ‎233, 230, 299, 297 (2) (b) and 411 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State C17, Vol 3 Laws of Lagos State, 2015.

  • Presidency insists judges must step down for trial

    Presidency insists judges must step down for trial

    Why DSS won’t give NJC evidence
    NJC to act before CJN’s exit
    Council bars judges from taking gifts

    The Presidency is insisting that two Supreme Court Justices and four others must step aside ahead of their trial for alleged corruption, it was learnt last night.

    It also faulted Chief Justice Mahmud Mohammed’s claim that the Judiciary had issues with the Department of State Services (DSS), not the Federal Government.

    It was also learnt that the DSS refused to release the evidence against the judges under probe to the National Judicial Council (NJC) in order not to prejudice their trial.

    Those under investigation by the DSS are two Supreme Court Justices -Justice Sylvester Ngwuta and Justice Inyang Okoro; the suspended Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, Ilorin Division, Justice Mohammed Ladan Tsamiya, who was picked up in Sokoto; Justice Adeniyi Ademola (Federal High Court); the Chief Judge of Enugu State, Justice I. A. Umezulike;  Justice Kabiru Auta of Kano State High Court;  Justice Muazu Pindiga (Gombe State High Court);  Justice Bashir Sukola and  Justice Ladan Manir, from the Kaduna State High Court.

    Of the nine judges, the NJC has recommended sanctions for Justice Tsamiya; Justice. Umezulike and Justice Kabiru Auta.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission(EFCC) is investigating six judges of the Federal High Court. They are: Justices Mohammed Nasir Yunusa; Hyeladzira Ajiya Nganjiwa; Musa Haruna Kurya; Agbadu James Fishim; Uwani Abba Aji; and Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.

    But the NJC has refused to suspend six of the judges because, according to the Judicial agency, the DSS is yet to submit petitions and evidence against them.

    The government however said the judges must step aside to clear their names instead of facing trial while on the bench.

    A top government source, who spoke in confidence, said: “The government has made its position known to the CJN. On why the judges should step aside ahead of their trial. The government will not yield ground on this.

    “If we go ahead to arraign them in court, the same CJN and NJC will accuse the government of desecrating the Judiciary. The right step now is to allow the judges to face trial and clear the allegations against them.

    “It is unfortunate that what the CJN told the government on how to handle the case of the judges was different from the statement he issued.

    “We are suspecting that the CJN might be under pressure from his colleagues or he wants to leave the fate of the judges to his successor.

    “He cannot rationalise by making a distinction between the Federal Government and the DSS. The government was in support of the sting operations of the security agency. So, the DSS did not act unilaterally.

    “We will not take up issues with the CJN because the Nigerian Bar Association(NBA), some former Supreme Court Justices and the Body of Benchers have supported the position of the government that the judges should step aside.”

    The source added: “Some of the judges in their letters to the CJN admitted having huge cash at home as if their houses are banks. In some jurisdictions, no judge can have up to $5,000 dollars at hand.

    “We have a case of a judge who had never withdrawn a kobo from his salary account. How does he feed? Yet, the CJN was put into confidence on some of these issues at a meeting with some government officials. In what other way can the government respect the Judiciary?

    It was learnt at the weekend that the NJC might meet this week or before the November 10 exit date of the CJN on the petitions against some judges.

    It was gathered that the NJC session scheduled for Saturday was suddenly shifted following pressure from some quarters.

    A member of the NJC said: “Yes, our meeting was postponed at the last minute because of certain circumstances. We are hopeful that we may meet this week, depending on the disposition of the CJN.

    “What is however clear is that we will hold a meeting before the exit date of the CJN. We have to take a decision on some petitions against some judges before the council. One of the petitions is a high profile one.

    “It is also statutory that we meet to bid the CJN a farewell and ratify some recommendations on some judges.”

    It was gathered that the DSS refused to release evidence against the embattled judges to the NJC in order not to lay all the cards on the table before their trial.

    The DSS suspects that there is no way the judges will not be privy to the evidence against them and they may begin to frustrate their trial with preliminary objection.

    The agency prefers encounters with the judges in court instead of the NJC, which is a disciplinary body.

    A security source said: “With the suspicious manner the  NJC threw away some cases/ petitions  against some judges, the DSS cannot take such a risk to make all its evidence available to the body.

    “Take the case of a judge who was implicated in a N500million bribery, the Petition Review Committee of the NJC cleared him. This is a judge who admitted on tape to have collected bribe.

    “It took some persistence by a petitioner before the NJC could accept to sanction the Chief Judge of Enugu State. He was retired after about four petitions against him.

    “Another judge accused of demanding N200million was retired by the NJC when the law is explicit on what should be done.

    “To give evidence to NJC will amount to prejudging the judges. The DSS conducted sting operations in some judges’ quarters; it believes the law should take its course through trial.

    “Once the evidence are made available to the NJC, the trial of the judges will suffer a setback from the outset because they will know what the government has against them.”