The Nation Newspaper

Tag: trial

  • Cynthia: Judge warns defendants against delay tactics 

    Cynthia: Judge warns defendants against delay tactics 

    Justice Olabisi Akinlade of a Lagos State High Court sitting in Igbosere Monday warned the four men standing trial for the alleged murder of Cynthia Osukogu, a postgraduate student of Nasarawa State University, against attempting to delay the case.

    The trial which began in 2012, was scheduled for adoption of final written addresses yesterday, but suffered another setback when the defendants’ counsel sought for more time to file the addresses.

    The trial has suffered a series of adjournments due to delays by the defendants’ counsel in filing their written addresses since 2015.

    Justice Akinlade, who did not hide her displeasure over the delay Monday, warned the defence to stop giving flimsy excuses to delay the trial.

    During hearing in August 2015, the judge threatened to send the fourth defendant, Nonso Ezike, back to prison for deliberately stalling trial.

    Osukogu was allegedly murdered by friends she met on social media website, Facebook, on July 22, 2012, at Cosmilla Hotel, Lake View Estate, Festac Town in Lagos.

    The defendants, Okwumo Nwabufor, Olisaeloka Ezike, Orji Osita and Nonso Ejike, are standing trial on a two-count charge of conspiracy and murder.

    The case was adjourned till June 8, for the adoption of written addresses.

  • Stop Saraki’s trial, say CNPP, IPAC

    Stop Saraki’s trial, say CNPP, IPAC

    The Congress of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP) and Inter Party Advisory Council (IPAC) in Kwara State have joined those demanding the stoppage of the trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    They said in statements that the trial was borne out of political vendetta and not a fight against corruption as its initiators wanted the public to believe.

    IPAC’s statement was signed by its Chairman and Secretary, Alhaji Adebayo Lawal and Dave Ifabiyi; while CNPP’s was signed by its Secretary, Prince Olufemi Adeleke.

    IPAC statement reads: “What is happening in the political arena, as far as the Senate presidency is concerned, is nothing short of tyrannical rule.

    “Any democratic dispensation that practises such is nothing short of dictatorship and nepotism.

    “This is an action that any Nigerian, who values the norms of democracy, will not adopt. We should not allow the ‘man’ to die in us.

    “In advanced democracies of the world where the bi-camera legislature is practised, members of the hallowed chambers reserve the right to elect whoever they want to lead them.”

    It urged the CCT to toe the line of sanity and fair play.

    “The Senate president should no longer be compelled to appear before the CCT since he has his team of erudite lawyers representing him.

    “The charges should be reviewed to eliminate areas of witch-hunt, vilification and persecution in view of the fact that the declaration was legally logged over 10 years ago.”

    The CNPP said: “We say no to the continued castigation and victimisation of the person of the Senate president on those trumped-up allegations.”

  • ‎Court rules out trial within trial on Ejigbo three

    ‎Court rules out trial within trial on Ejigbo three

    The trial within trial in the matter involving the tortured Ejigbo women failed to hold Thursday at a Lagos High court sitting in Ikeja.

    This was because the court presided by Justice Oluwatoyin Ipaye reversed her ruling which earlier granted the request of the defence for a trial within trial to determine the admissibility of the statements of the sixth‎ and seventh defendants.

    ‎The decision of the court was sequel to the submission of the prosecution led by Akin George that it would amount to wasting the time of the court if a trial is conducted within the main trial on the statement of the 6th and 7th defendants.

    Justice Ipaye ruled that the trial within trial was no longer neccessary owing to the fact that the statement of the 6th defendant was not confessional as claimed earlier.

    At its last sitting of the court, Justice Ipaye had granted the prayer of the defence counsel, Mr J.H Basir to the 6, 7,8, 9 and 10 defendants to conduct a trial within trial in order to determine if truly the statement of the 6th and 7th defendants said to be confessional were given by his clients.

    But at the resume of the hearing Thursday, the prosecution led by Mr. Akin George informed the court that the prayer of the defense counsel earlier granted by the court will only amount to a wild goose chase.

    George argued that it is only if the statement of the defendants are confessional that the the court could approve trial within trial.

    Citing section 28 and 29 of the Evidence Act, George said the‎ defence is seeking to approbate and reprobate by asking for a trial within trial as that would further drag the matter

    “The statement of the defendants before the court is not confessional. Therefore, the court has the power to over- rule the previous ruling on trial within trial.”

    “I thereby urged the court to overrule the previous pronouncement on the matter”, he said.

    In his response, counsel to the defendants, Mr Bashir told the court that the prosecution had failed to file an appeal against the previous ruling of the court.
    ‎
    Said he: “It is the duty of the court to determine whether a statement is confessional or not”.

    Bashir urged the court to discountenance the objection raised by the prosecution.

    After listening to the submission of the parties, the judge in her fresh ruling withdrew the trial within trial that was earlier granted the defence.

    Thereafter, the defence moved a motion of notice before the court seeking an extension of the time given him for cross-examination in view of the fact that he is representing five defendants.

    Bashir argued that the time given to him was the same allotted to other counsels who are representing one or two defendants.

    He urged the court to allow him re-examine the third prosecution witness (PW3).

    However, the prosecution objected to the request of the defence saying that it was an attempt to draw the court back on matters that are already gone.

    Justice Ipaye in her ruling declined the prayer of the defence and said that the defence counsel had enough time to do his job.

    “I have scrutinised the applications by counsels and in the view of the facts before the court, I rule that the application is without evidence and is hereby dismissed.”

    Justice Ipaye subsequently adjourned the matter till April 20 and 21, 2016 for continuation of trial.

     

  • I’m ready for trial – Kalu

    I’m ready for trial – Kalu

    Former governor of Abia State, Dr. Orji Kalu Friday welcomed the verdict of the Supreme Court directing his trial by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for alleged N2.4billion fraud when he ran the affairs of the state between 1999 and 2007.

    The apex court had dismissed his appeal for lacking in merit.

    Kalu who in the  appeal, had sought to quash the charge of money laundering brought against him by EFCC, said moment after the Supreme Court’s ruling Friday that “this is another opportunity to prove my innocence.”

    “I have all the records and facts of the case. I am willing to submit myself for the rule of law to take its course. That has always been my passion advocacy right from the lower courts where the case enamnated,” he said from London.

    He added: “this clarification has become imperative lest oppositional forces mischievously misinterpret the ruling and mislead the public by injecting their jaundiced opinions into the routine directive as had always been with similar cases where the apex court intervened.”

    He assured the EFCC of  his “continued support and profound cooperation in any further investigation into this allegation,’’  and also claimed it “is part of the price I have to pay for opposing the third-term agenda fiasco of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.”

    A similar appeal by Kalu’s associate, Udeh Jones Udehogo was similarly dismissed Friday by the Supreme Court for the same reason.

    Justice Suleiman Galadima, who wrote the lead judgments in both appeals, upheld the concurrent decisions of the Federal High Court, Abuja and Appeal Court, Abuja in refusing the appeals.

    The five-man panel of the apex court, in its unanimous judgments, directed the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to assign the cases to new judges for hearing.

    On Kalu’s case, Justice Galadima, whose judgment was read by Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, said: “The appellant had approached the Federal High Court, Abuja to quash the charges made against him by the EFCC.

    “The Court dismissed the case. He went to the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division. He lost and approached this court.

    “Having considered all issues raised and arguments by parties, I come to the conclusion that I cannot, but help in dismissing this appeal for lacking in merit. It is dismissed.

    “I affirm the decision of the court bellow, which rightly affirmed the decision of the Federal High Court, that it was not bound by the ex-parte order of the Abia State High Court as to vitiate the charges preferred against the appellant.

    “The learned Chief Judge of the Federal High Court should assign the case to another judge for expeditious trial,” Justice Galadima said.

    Other members of the panel: Justice Mahmud Mohammed (the Chief Justice of Nigeria), Bode Rhodes-Vivour, Sylvester Nwgwuta and Datijo Mohammed agreed with the lead judgments in both appeals.

    In its decision on April 27, 2012 the Court of Appeal, Abuja division dismissed the appeal by Kalu against the ruling of the Federal High Court, Abuja dismissing his motion seeking to quash the charge against him and his company, Slok Nigeria Limited.

    Justice Ejembi Eko, who read the judgment on behalf of Justices Kayode Bada and Regina Nwodo resolved all issues in the appeal against Kalu and his company and dismissed the appeal for lacking in merit.

    Justice Eko noted that the proof of evidence attached to the 97 count charge preferred against the appellants by the EFCC disclosed a prima facie case against the former governor and others.

    Justice Eko said the facts raised in the proof of evidence established a prima facie case against the appellants. He further said that as far as there is a link which prima facie is all about, the appellants had an obligation to stand trial to defend themselves.

    He further ruled that the ex-parte order of May 31, 2007 by Abia State High Court, asking the Federal High Court to stay all proceedings against Orji was a racquet suit aimed at frustrating his arrest and subsequent prosecution.

    “That order was an order at large, personal rather than definite. It was an order made as an ex-parte and not at the course of trial.”

    He described the ex-parte motion as an abuse of court process.

    Justice Eko said the claim of breach of personal freedom raised by Orji was sentimental in nature, adding that the claim bordered on the realm of conspiracy theory and is politically motivated.

    He said right to personal liberty is not absolute.

    On whether EFCC had the competence to charge the appellants, Justice Eko held that both the EFCC Establishment Act and the Money laundering and Prohibition Act, (MPLA, 2003, 2004) had given the commission power to prosecute offenders.

    “EFCC derives its competence to prosecute from section 6 and 7 of its Establishing Act. Equally, the definition of economic crime is quite wide,” he said.

    The appellate court further held that the proof of evidence attached to the 97-count charge preferred against the appellants by the EFCC disclosed a prima facie case against the former governor and others.

    Justice Eko also denounced the ex-parte order of May 31, 2007 by the Abia State High Court.

    “That order was an order at large, personal rather than definite. It was an order made as an ex-parte and not at the course of trial.”

    The EFCC had on July 27, 2007 arraigned Kalu before the High Court in Abuja on charges of money laundering, official corruption and criminal diversion of public funds totaling over N5 billion.

    On September 3, 2007 Kalu filed a motion before the court seeking an order to strike out all EFCC charges against him and to vacate the terms and conditions of the bail earlier granted by the court. The court dismissed the motion, a decision Kalu appealed to the Court of Appeal.

     

     

  • Saraki’s CCT trial adjourned till March 18

    Saraki’s CCT trial adjourned till March 18

    Friday, March 18 has been fixed for arguments of the motion on jurisdiction of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to try Senate President Bukola Saraki on a charge of alleged false asset declaration.

     

    President of the CCT, Danladi Umar, who adjourned the trial on Friday asked the defence to ensure that all motions and processes should be served on the prosecution counsel to avoid further delay of the trial.

    Details later

  • Dokpesi: Court fixes April 28 for commencement of trial  

    Dokpesi: Court fixes April 28 for commencement of trial  

    A Federal High Court in Abuja Wednesday fixed April 28 for the commencement of trial in the case against businessman, Raymond Dokpesi and his company, Daar Investment and Holdings Limited.

    They were arraigned before the court 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 was diverted to fund the presidential campaign of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), an act said to be a breach of provisions of the Public Procurement Act, Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act.

    Justice James Tsoho fixed the date Wednesday after lawyers to parties agreed to return on April 28 following their inability to agree on the need to allow the commencement of trial.

    When the case was called, lawyer to Dokpesi and his company, Wole Olanipekun (SAN) sought clarification from the judge on the position of the case in view of media reports, which quoted the judge as saying the case was assigned to him in error and that it had been sent back to the earlier trial judge.

    Justice Tsoho explained that although he learnt the case and other similar ones were sent to his court in error, he has now been allowed to continue to hear the Dokpesi case because “steps have been taken.”

    He said unlike the one involving former Head of Civil Service of the Federation, Steven Oronsaye, who had not been re-arraigned before him, steps have been taken in the Dokpesi case, where the defendants have been re-arraigned.

    Shortly after the judge’s explanation, prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) told the court he was ready for trial and that his first witness was in court. As he made move to invite the witness, Olanipekun sprang up, and queried the legitimacy of the additional proof of evidence just filed by the prosecution.

    He said the bundle of documents was not served on him on time and that it was not properly filed before the court because the prosecution did not first obtain the court’s permission to file additional proof.

    Olanipekun also complained about the quality of the documents, which were mainly written statements of additional witnesses to be called by the prosecution. He noted that copies of the states in the proof served on him were not legible.

    Responding, Jacobs insisted that the additional proof of evidence was properly filed as the prosecution, under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 is not required to first obtain the court’s permission before filing proof.

    “The ACJA, in section 379 and 380 have made provisions as to the filing of proof of evidence. In Section 379(2) the prosecution is given the discretion to file additional proof at any time before judgment, without constraints or inhibition. No leave is required

    “This provision is in line with the decision of the Supreme Court in Nguru and the State: 2007 3 NWLR part 771 page 304. The provision requires the prosecution to merely inform the court about the filing of the proof of evidence, but not to first seek the court’s leave,” Jacobs said.

    He however agreed to provide Olanipekun with more legible copies of the documents as requested.

    The judge, at that point asked parties to agree on a convenient date for the commencement of trial. They later agreed to return on April 28.

  • ‘Trial’ of the Generals

    Nearly nine months into his administration, President Muhammadu Buhari appears set to restore military pride in the aftermath of decline under his predecessor, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    Concerned by the near-fall of a once mighty Nigerian military upon assumption of office, the president vowed to reverse the trend of having to engage South African mercenaries to combat Boko Haram fundamentalists, while the infantry retreated from the rampaging insurgents.

    Reduced at the time to the unconventional method of shopping for arms and ammunition in cash via government officials, the military top brass under Jonathan blamed the situation on poor funding, lily-livered soldiers and the United States of America’s reluctance to supply needed weapons.

    But evidence suggested otherwise: the military simultaneously waged two wars – one against terrorists and the other against public perception of a corrupt force.

    While the blame game lasted, the implacable insurgents took territory after territory until 21 of 27 local government areas of a Northeast state allegedly could not be accounted for by the government. In most of the places annexed, the terrorists hoisted their flag and imposed their brand of Islamic rule to signify a ‘conquered’ enclave – to the consternation of the world.

    But Buhari – a distinguished Army General and former head of state – was always unlikely to toe his predecessor’s path. For him, labelling rebellious troops ‘cowards’ and sentencing them to death by court martial as Generals did under Dr Jonathan would not suffice.

    Reprieve has since come the way of many of the affected soldiers, who, it emerged, often confronted rugged, well-armed terrorists with soft weapons and delicate morale. Buhari chose to tackle an issue that might have been considered untouchable under Jonathan: probe of sullied Generals.

    The president ordered the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to investigate the former Chief of Defence Staff, Air Vice Marshal Alex Sabundu Badeh, 59, and former Chief of Air Staff, Air Vice Marshal Adesola Nunayon Amosu, 57, for prominent roles in the purchase of military hardware during their tenures.

    Twenty-one firms as well as 15 other retired and serving military officers would also be captured in scrutiny of the arms procurement scam.

    The president issued the directive mid-January following a report submitted by the panel he set up to audit arms and equipment procured between 2007 and 2015. The committee had confirmed that Nigeria spent about $2 billion and another N29 billion on the Nigeria Air Force (NAF) procurement alone during the period in review.

    As related by the Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Mallam Garba Shehu, EFCC would probe the 21 companies and their directors for alleged fundamental breaches associated with the procurements by the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) and the Air Force.

    The president directed the anti-graft commission to investigate the roles of officers, individuals, companies and their directors thought to have fundamentally breached standard procedures associated with the procurements.

    Mallam Shehu said that offences outlined by the investigating panel against the individuals and companies included “non-specification of procurement costs, absence of contract agreements, award of contracts beyond authorised thresholds, transfer of public funds for unidentified purposes and general non-adherence to provisions of the Public Procurement Act.”

     

    Besides, “the procurement processes were arbitrarily carried out and generally characterised by irregularities and fraud.

    In many cases, the procured items failed to meet the purposes they were procured for, especially the counter insurgency efforts in the Northeast.”

    The charges include helicopters acquired without rotor blades and upgrade accessories, radar systems without vital components and, specifically under Amosu, alpha jets purchased against recommendation. All were delivered in hazy circumstances and at heart-stopping rates.

    Badeh is being questioned on contracts awarded under his leadership amounting to $930.5 million. The money is said to be part of the $2.1 billion meant for the purchase of arms, which was under the control of the ONSA, then occupied by Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd.).

    Dasuki, Badeh, Amosu and other retired military chiefs being interrogated for alleged corruption are likely to face separate charges, it emerged.

    While allegations swirled around the prime suspects, however, Jonathan employed a ludicrous defence of his record as Commander-in-Chief.

    Weapons ordered in his time aided his successor’s more successful campaign against Boko Haram, claimed the former president. Far from the truth, noted government officials, soldiers brandished outdated weapons and ‘bullion vans’ were deployed as armoured tanks.

    Thus emanated, in part, reason for the soldiers’ display of ‘cowardice’ that was denounced by Dasuki abroad, while the former CDS courted condemnation with a declaration that the military under his command was poorly equipped.

    EFCC, in the meantime, subjected Badeh to about 18 hours of interrogation since his detention. Based on statements by the ex-CDS and AVM Amosu (rtd.), EFCC also interrogated six serving Air Vice-Marshals, while security operatives are on alert to prevent individuals under investigation from fleeing the country.

    Amosu and some top Air Force personnel were arrested on January 28 to answer questions in connection with the arms probe.

    Probably connected with the scam, EFCC reportedly sealed the Abuja mansion of the former CDS. The commission also grilled Badeh’s son.

    As part of its investigations, the anti-graft agency is checking bank accounts that belong to some of the military chiefs and extending the search for illicit property to the United Arab Emirates and the United States with the cooperation of the countries.

    Global human rights organisation, Amnesty International (AI), called for the immediate investigation of top past and present military commanders for possible war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Nigeria military in the fight against Boko Haram. Military officers, including some under investigation for the weapons scam, are believed to be involved.

    The former Chief of Air Staff’s wife, Lara Amosu, was also detained overnight and released by the anti-corruption agency over allegations that some of the misappropriated arms fund was traced to her through her husband. Investigations conducted linked some of the controversial money with her accounts.

    About N3 billion was traced to Mrs Amosu’s accounts, while some assets acquired by the former service chief appeared in her name and some others in her company’s name, said an EFCC source. The anti-graft agency also retrieved $1 million cash from a ‘soak away’ pit after operatives carried out a search on Amosu’s residence in Badagry, Lagos.

    While the money is kept by EFCC as evidence towards the trial of the allegedly corrupt officials, a picture of the stash of dollars circulating on the Internet may not be related to the case. The photo reportedly shows a part of $600 million that belonged to Pablo “El Patron” Escobar, the most famous drug dealer in the history of Colombia, South America.

    Regardless of the error in the public assessment of the matter, the facts remain: the Generals cited in the arms scandal are under fire for perceived indiscretion. Against compelling evidence, they will have to prove in court that they are not guilty of misdemeanour worse than mutiny – accounting for more than a fair share of the bloodshed that has attended the six-year insurgency.

  • Ibadan murder trial to begin March 24

    •Deceased’s family seeks private lawyer

    A lawyer, Mrs. Yewande Oyediran, who was accused of stabbing her husband, Lowo, to death in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital, appeared yesterday at the high court before the chief judge, Justice Mukhtar Abimbola.

    The case had been transferred from the Chief Magistrate’s Court due to lack of jurisdiction to hear it.

    The accused, who covered her face with clothes,  arrived at 9:09am in company of armed prison officials.

    A lawyer, Michael Aliu, who claimed to be appearing on behalf of the deceased’s family, said he was in court to watch the brief.

    But the lead defence  counsel, Oloyede Ashanike,  objected.

    Justice Abimbola over-ruled the objection and granted Aliu the permission to watch the brief without making a speech.

    The prosecuting counsel, Tajudeen Abdul-Ganiyu, applied for the date for commencement of trial.

    He appealed to the judge to order the court bailiff to serve the defence counsel the document of the case.

    Justice Abimbola granted the appeal and ordered both counsel to pick a date for  commencement of trial.

    Abdul-Ganiyu said eight witnesses will testify, adding that they have agreed to begin trial on March 24.

    Justice Abimbola thereafter  adjourned till March  24.

    The Oyediran family filed a petition to involve a private lawyer in the matter.

    A letter dated February 15 addressed to the Permanent Secretary and Solicitor General, Ministry of Justice, by the family’s counsel, Kehinde Adesiyan, called for impartial independent lawyers to prosecute the case on behalf of the government.

    The petition, “Application for Fiat to prosecute the criminal case”, reads: “You will recall our earlier letter dated February 4 in which our client instructed us to appeal to your office and the Department of Public Prosecution to allow for untainted legal advice in respect of the above subject matter.

    “We really want to express our appreciation to your office for the prompt rendering of the legal advice in respect of this matter and the filing of information to the high court for the prosecution of this case.

    “Whilst the family appreciates your efforts, it feels that for there to be justice to all stakeholders, it will be fair and appropriate for impartial, independent lawyers to prosecute this case on behalf of the government.

    “This becomes necessary because the accused is a legal officer not only in the Ministry of Justice but she is also an officer in the Directorate of Public Prosecution.

    “Needless to say that the refusal of this application for fiat to prosecute this matter will violate the principles of fair hearing and natural justice.

    “As we all aware that justice is a three-way traffic for the accused, the victim and the society.

    “In view of the above explanation, we most respectfully apply for the fiat of the Ministry of Justice for private lawyers to prosecute this case on behalf of the ministry and the government.”

  • N5.2b ‘scam’: Borishade fails to stop trial

    Former Aviation Minister Babalola Aborishade failed yesterday in a bid to truncate his trial before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Maitama, Abuja.

    Aborishade is on trial with his ex-personal assistant, Tunde Dairo; ex-Managing Director of Nigeria Airspace Management Agency (NAMA), Rowland Iyayi; an Australian, George Eider and a firm, Avsatel Communications Limited.

    They were arraigned on November 19, 2009 for allegedly mismanaging a N5.2 billion Aviation Safe Tower contract.

    Yesterday, Justice Abubakar Sadiq Umar refused an application by lawyers to Aborishade and others, Kehinde Ogunwumiju and Regina Okotie-Eboh that the case be struck out on the grounds that the prosecution was not diligent with the trial.

    Justice Umar held yesterday that the withdrawal of a private lawyer engaged to prosecute the case on behalf of the government did not constitute an abandonment or lack of appearance of the prosecution.

    He refused defence lawyers’ application that the court should foreclose or discharge the defendants.

    The judge ordered the prosecution to continue. New prosecution lawyer Chime Okoroma presented his 10th witness, Reuben Omonigho, an operative with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Ogunwumiju objected, arguing that the witness had testified, saying it was defence turn to cross-examine him.

    The judge agreed, and later requested him to cross-examine the witness, a task he turned down and begged for time to prepare.

    Ogunwumiju said the court was yet to furnish him with its record of proceedings, which he had applied for.

    “We cannot afford to take chances with our own records, we need to be guided by the court”, Ogunwumiju said.

  • Ricky Tarfa gets bail, trial fixed for April 20

    Ricky Tarfa gets bail, trial fixed for April 20

    • 99 lawyers, including 32 SANS defend Silk in court

    Justice Aishat Opesanwo of a Lagos State High Court sitting in Igbosere Tuesday granted a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, Ricky Tarfa bail on self recognisance in a suit filed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    The EFCC arraigned Tarfa Tuesday on a two-count charge bordering on obstruction of justice and attempting to pervert the course of justice by communicating with a Federal High Court judge that was handling a suit filed by him against the commission.

    Justice Opesanwo fixed March 14 for hearing of an application filed by Tarfa asking the court to quash the charges.

    The court also reserved April 20 for commencement of trial.

    In charge No- LD/2417C/16 the EFCC alleged that on February 5, 2016, Tarfa hid two suspects, Nazaire Sorou Gnanhoue and Modeste Finagnon, both Beninoise, in his Mercedes Benz Sports Utility (SUV) vehicle, thereby shielding them from being arrested and wilfully obstructing the course of justice.

    The Beninoise were alleged to have fraudulently converted some sophisticated manufacturing equipment belonging to Rana Prestige Nigeria Limited to their use.

    They are also being investigated for alleged tax evasion running into millions of naira.

    Tarfa was alleged to have prevented two operatives of the EFCC, who were officially detailed to effect the suspects’ arrest, from carrying out their statutory duties.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, 99 lawyers including 32 SANS were announced as part of the defence team of Tarfa.

    Defence counsel, Niyi Akinola SAN led 14 other learned silks including Mike Ozekhome and tens of other lawyers in his application for bail brought pursuant to Section 115 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law.

    He urged the court to grant the defendant bail on self-recognition.

    Akintola told the court that the defendant was granted administrative bail by the EFCC and has consistently reported to the EFCC office every morning by 8:00am.

    He stated that the defendant had submitted himself for trial and was prepared to defend the charge filed against him by the Commission.

    The learned silk added that being a SAN, the defendant would not jump bail, and that he had over 16 lawyers in his law firm.

    But, opposing the application, EFCC lawyer Rotimi Oyedepo urged the court to dismiss the application for bail and remand the defendant in prison custody.

    He urged the court to discountenance the argument that the defendant is a SAN, adding that in consideration of the nature of the crime, the personality of the defendant was irrelevant.

    Oyedepo also stressed that Tarfa was granted administrative bail by the EFCC only after an undertaken by the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Austin Alegeh.

    Justice Opesanwo stood the matter down to consider the defence counsel’s application. On her return almost two hours later, she ruled in Tarfa’s favour.

    She stated that the defendant presented overwhelming evidence before the court that was not controverted by the prosecution.
    The court added that the prosecution did not deny the fact that Tarfa was granted administrative bail and did not default.

    The judge granted the defendant bail on self recognition but ordered that Tarfa should not travel out the country without obtaining the court’s approval.

    The two-count charge reads: “That you Rickey Tarfa on or about February 5, 2016 within the jurisdiction of the court wilfully obstructed Moses Awolusi and Sanusi Muhammed, authorised officers of the EFCC, from arresting Nazaire Sorou Gnanhoue and Modeste Finance who were reasonably suspected to have committed economic and financial crimes by keeping the said suspects in your car between 11:00 hours to 16:30 hours”.

    “That you Rickey Tarfa SAN between May 11 and June 25, 2015 in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of the court attempted to pervert the course of justice by communicating with Justice Mohammed Yinusa of the Federal High Court through your mobile telephone no-08034600000 while suit No-FHC/716 between Hair Prestige Manufacturing Nigeria and EFCC filed by you on behalf of the applicants seeking to restrain the Commission from performing its statutory duties were pending before the said judge.”