TheNewsGuru

Tag: Court

  • JUST IN: Finally, Supreme Court quashes 36 states’ suit against FG over recovered loot

    JUST IN: Finally, Supreme Court quashes 36 states’ suit against FG over recovered loot

    The Supreme Court has quashed a suit by the 36 states’ governments and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) challenging the federal government’s application of recovered looted funds.

    In a judgment on Friday, a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court was unanimous in holding that the suit was wrongly instituted before the apex court.

    In the lead judgment, prepared by Justice Chidiebere Uwa, but read by Justice Mohammed Idris, the apex court held that the plaintiffs wrongly invoked its jurisdiction.

    It held that the subject matter of the suit, marked: SC/CV/395/2021, was within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

    The plaintiffs had claimed that “between 2015 and 2021 when the suit was filed, the FG has secured both international and municipal forfeiture, recovery and repatriation of “stolen assets” in the sum of NI,836,906,543,658.73, about 167 properties, 450 cars, 300 trucks and cargoes, and 20,000,000 barrels of crude oil worth over N450million,” which it allegedly failed to remit as required by the Constitution.

    They alleged that instead of paying the cash into the Federation Account, the FG illegally diverted it into the Consolidated Revenue Accounts (CRA) and other accounts not recognised by the Nigerian Constitution.

    The states argued that the CRA is the account into which FG’s share from the Federation Account, other federal earnings and funds belonging to specific state governments are paid.

    They added that other federal earnings payable to the CRAs include receipts from federal government licenses and land revenue, administrative fees, earnings and sales, rent of government property, interests from federal government investments, repayments from state governments, Personal Income Tax of Armed Forces and others.

    The plaintiffs stated that by establishing the Asset Recovery Account and Interim Forfeiture Recovery Account, into which revenue from recovered assets was to be paid, the Asset Recovery Regulation contradicts the provisions of the Constitution.

    They noted that since 2015, “numerous recoveries of illegally acquired assets have been secured through anti-corruption and law enforcement agencies,” including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Nigerian Police Force and the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation.

    The plaintiffs, citing sections 162(1), 162 (10) and 80 of the Constitution and section 2 of the Finance (Control and Management) Act, 1958, argued that recovered funds qualify as revenue payable to the Federation Account instead of the Consolidated Revenue Account of the Federal Government.

    They stated that it is “unconstitutional to remit or divert revenue payable into the Federation Account to the Consolidated Revenue Account of the Federal Government or any other account whatsoever, or to apply the said revenue to any other purpose,” the plaintiffs argued.

    The plaintiffs prayed the court to, among others, declare, “that by the provisions of Section 162(1) and Section 162(10) of the Constitution of all income, returns, proceeds or receipts howsoever described derived from confiscated, forfeited and/or recovered assets constitute revenue of the federal republic of Nigeria, must be remitted to the Federation Account for the collective benefit of the federal, state and local governments.

    They urged the court to issue a d order compelling the remittance of N1.8 trillion (cash) and N450 billion (non-cash) in recovered loot since 2015 into the federation account.

    The plaintiffs also prayed the court to compel the defendants to give a detailed account of the recovered assets that are not remitted into the Federation Account by the President, as well as all the relevant officials and agencies of government.

    They also want the apex court to compel the FG, through the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission (RMFAC), to design the modalities for distributing recovered assets among the federating units.

  • Jealous girlfriend stabs boyfriend for cheating on her

    Jealous girlfriend stabs boyfriend for cheating on her

    A 23-year-old woman, Abigail Victor, was on Wednesday arraigned before a Kaduna Magistrate’s Court for allegedly stabbing her boyfriend with a knife.

    Victor, a resident of Ungwan Sunday, Kaduna, was facing a two-count charge of conspiracy and causing injury.

    The Prosecutor, Insp Chidi Leo, told the court that the defendant committed the offences on May 17 at Sabon Tasha, Kaduna.

    Leo said the defendant conspired with two others at large to beat her boyfriend, Dominic James, and also stab him with a knife in his shoulder.

    He said the defendant, who had a misunderstanding with the complainant, accused him of cheating on her.

    “In the process, she called two of her friends who came to the complainant’s house, beat him up and stabbed him.

    “It took the intervention of neighbours who came to the aid of the complainant and rushed him to a hospital. The offences contravene Sections 58 and 284 of the Penal Code of Kaduna State, 2017.

    “Section 58 attracts a one-year prison term if found guilty, while Section 284 attracts a prison term of not less than five years if found guilty,” he said.

    The defendant pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    The Magistrate, Ibrahim Emmanuel, granted bail to the defendant in the sum of N200,000 with one surety in like sum.

    He said the surety must be a blood relation to the defendant and must present a three year tax clearance to the Kaduna State Government.

    Emmanuel adjourned the case until June 17 for hearing.

  • Lawyer, one other killed after court session in Anambra

    Lawyer, one other killed after court session in Anambra

    A lawyer and one other individual were shot dead in Anambra State after attending a court session. The Anambra State Police Command has launched a manhunt for the suspected assailants responsible for the killings, which occurred in Egbebelu village, Ekwulobia, Orumba North Local Government Area.

    According to a statement issued Thursday in Awka by Police Public Relations Officer, SP Tochukwu Ikenga, the victims were ambushed while returning from High Court II, Ekwulobia, where the lawyer had just secured bail for a client facing trial for murder.

    Ikenga reported that three people, including the lawyer, were attacked — two fatally, while one survived and is currently receiving medical treatment at a confidential location. The survivor has since provided the police with valuable information to aid the investigation.

    Preliminary findings suggest the victims were trailed from the courthouse before being intercepted and shot by gunmen. A red Toyota Camry, believed to belong to one of the deceased, was recovered from the crime scene.

    In response, the Commissioner of Police, CP Ikioye Orutugu, visited the scene with senior officers, including the Deputy Commissioner of Police in charge of Operations. The CP has ordered a thorough investigation and deployed tactical and intelligence units to pursue the culprits and ensure justice is served.

  • 2014 Nyanya bombing: Court threatens to strike out case

    2014 Nyanya bombing: Court threatens to strike out case

    The Federal High Court, Abuja on Thursday, threatened to strike out the case against the alleged masterminds of the 2014 Nyanya bombing.

    Justice Peter Lifu made the threat following the absence of the prosecuting counsel in court for the umpteenth time.

    Aminu Ogwuche alongside five others are standing trial for orchestrating the bombing that claimed at least 75 lives and left many more injured.

    The other accused persons are Ahmad Rufai Abubakar (a.k.a Abu Ibrahim/Maiturare), Mohammed Sani Ishaq, Ya’u Saidu (a.k.a Kofar Rama), Anas Isah, Adamu Yusuf and Nasiru Abubakar.

    The defendants were arraigned in 2014 before Justice Ahmed Mohammed but following his elevation to the Court of Appeal, the case had to start afresh before Justice Lifu.

    When the matter was called, although all the defendants and their counsel were present in court, there was no legal representation from the prosecution.

    The registrar of the court told the judge that the prosecuting counsel sent a letter to the court asking for an adjournment.

    Counsel to Ogwuche, who is the first defendant, Mr A.I Abbas told the court that he saw the letter from the prosecution seeking and adjournment in court.

    Abbas told the court that he had prayed the court on the last adjourned date to strike out the case and that he still stood by his application.

    “The prosecution is not willing to proceed with this matter, they have been several delays from them and we have been condoning them

    “The defendants are still innocent and from the charge, it is indicated that the defendants have been in custody for over 11 years.

    “There is no reason for the delay so I pray the court to strike out this charge.”

    He said that the defendants were Nigerians and would remain in Nigeria when the prosecution is ready to proceed with the case.

    Echoing this sentiment, Mr A. M Yawuri, representing the 3rd and 4th defendants, highlighted the constitutional right to a speedy trial. “11 years on trial is anything but speedy,” he said.

    Yawuri criticized the prosecution’s repeated excuses, pointing out that the Attorney-General’s office boasts a large pool of lawyers who could have appeared in court but chose not to, effectively jeopardising the defendants’ right to justice.

    “The chamber of the Attorney-General of the Federation is about the largest chamber in the country and any of the multitudes of lawyers in that chamber could have been in court today but they chose to jeopardise the freedom of the defendants to a speedy trial,” he argued.

    “11 years on trial cannot be said to be speedy trial as envisaged by the constitution.

    “My client told me today that he had appeared before Justice Ahmed Mohammed 88 times and has appeared before my Lord 9times already.

    “He also said that for the 11 years that they have been in custody, they have been denied sunlight and they see sunlight only when they come to court.”

    The lawyer told the court that the capacity-building and training as reasons for the prosecution’s absence has become all too familiar.

    He subsequently prayed the court to strike out the charge against the defendants and release them until the prosecution is ready to proceed with the trial.

    For his part, counsel to the 5th defendant, Mr Umar Yakubu told the court that due to frustration owing to the long incarceration, his client was willing to change his plea from “not guilty” to “guilty” just so that he could leave the custody of the Department  of State Services, (DSS).

    Yakubu also prayed the court to strike out the case and discharge his client until the prosecution was ready to proceed.

    In a ruling, Justice Lifu acknowledged the seriousness of the charges but decried the prosecution’s failure to provide convincing reasons for the endless delay.

    He said that the case had been pending since Dec. 12, 2014, but that the reasons for the defendants’ prolonged incarceration without trial have never been reasonably explained to the court.

    Justice Lifu said that he would give the prosecution one final chance to prove their case and set trial dates for June 18 and 19.

    He, however, warned that any further delays could lead to the case being struck out.

    “This is a seven-count charge bordering on terrorism and terrorist acts. It has been pending in court since Dec. 12 2014.

    “The reasons for the long incarceration of the defendants without trial for 11 years have not been reasonably explained to the court, not even for once.

    “Going by the record of this court, the reason for any adjournment by the prosecution has always been the same.

    “The office of the Attorney-General of the Federation has a large number of learned men in its pool and department.

    “In my considered view, going by the checkered history of this case and it’s trajectory, the reasons for adjournment are not cogent, compelling and convincing neither are they comprehensive to warrant an adjournment,” the judge held.

    The judge also ordered the DSS to allow all defendant’s counsel, their parents, blood relations and desirable friends to have access to them to allow them prepare for their trial and for the sake of their mental and psychological health.

  • ECOWAS court orders Nigeria to release man detained for 16 years

    ECOWAS court orders Nigeria to release man detained for 16 years

    The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Court has ordered the Federal Government of Nigeria to release a Nigerian businessman, Moses Abiodun, who has been in detention since 2009 without trial.

    The court on Thursday, also ordered the Nigerian Government to pay N20 million compensation to the victim for what it described as the “multiple violations” of his fundamental human rights.

    Abiodun had filed the suit marked: ECW/CCJ/APP/56/22, alleging that he was arrested by operatives of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) police unit in November, 2008.

    The applicant had alleged that he was later detained, initially for five months without charge, and subsequently on a remand order issued on March 23, 2009 by a Magistrates Court in Lagos State.

    According to the applicant, he has never been formally charged, tried, or convicted of any offence throughout the 16 years that he was rotting away in custody.

    He contended in his submission before the Community Court that his prolonged detention violated his rights under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other international instruments to which Nigeria was a party.

    The Nigerian Government in its submission before the Community Court, however, denied the allegations.

    The government had questioned the authenticity of the remand warrant presented by the Applicant, and challenged the admissibility of the case.

    Delivering judgment, the court held that the prolonged detention of the applicant constituted a grave violation of his rights to liberty.

    According to the court, the act is in breach of Article 6 of the African Charter and Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

    The Court also held that the prolonged unlawful detention infringed his right to freedom of movement, as guaranteed under Article 12 of both the African Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

    The Court declared that detaining a person for 16 years without formal charges, or a fair and timely trial, was an egregious violation of Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter.

    It further declared that Abiodun’s continued detention was tantamount to anticipatory punishment and constituted inhuman and degrading treatment, which breached Article 5 of the African Charter and Article 7 of the ICCPR.

    The court therefore ordered the immediate release of the applicant from detention and awarded N20 million in compensation to him for the violations suffered.

    The three-member panel of the court was presided over by it Vice President, Justice Sengu Koroma, while the judgment was read by Justice Edward Asante, with Justice Gbéri-bè Ouattara as member.

  • Court dismisses £950trn suit filed against Atiku Abubakar, others

    Court dismisses £950trn suit filed against Atiku Abubakar, others

    The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday, dismissed a 950 trillion Pounds suit filed by a businessman, Mr Tunde Omosebi, against former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar and others over allegations bordering on breach of fundamental rights.

    Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, held that the suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/767/2024 and filed by Omosebi, was “highly unreasonable.”

    The applicant had, in the originating motion dated and filed on June 5, 2024, by himself, sued Hallies & Partner Ltd, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, Clifford Odibe and Daniel Mbohok as 1st to 4th defendants respectively.

    In the course of proceedings on the matter, Omosebi amended the suit by joining three persons; Ali Olayemi, Phrank Shaibu, without the leave (permission) of court, and later expanded to 13 defendants by May 5.

    Omosebi, in the statement of applicant attached to the motion, described himself as “a businessman, politician and by virtue of his positions as Chairman, Federal Executive Council (FEC) and Prime Minister of Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    He averred that he gets paid based on his positions, projects and contracts executed by his investments portfolio and businesses as contained in the corporate chatter.

    He alleged that the agents of Hallies & Partner Ltd assaulted and criminally intimidated him at his office on July 6, 2023.

    He said they left the premises with numerous threats and inhumane comments which infringed on his liberty and freedom.

    He, therefore, demanded £950 trillion for alleged assault on his dignity, criminal intimidation, trauma, and enforcement of Fundamental Rights Rule 2009 guaranteed by the Constitution.

    Omosebi prayed the court to make an order for the defendants to tender public apology on national and international newspapers, magazines, televisions and across relevant media of his choice in perpetuity.

    He sought “an order restricting the defendants and associates from 20 kilometers radius of his businesses and property in perpetuity.”

    He equally sought a £95 trillion exemplary damages against the defendants, among others.

    Justice Omotosho, while delivering the judgement, reiterated the court’s responsibility to conserve judicial resources by filtering out cases deemed, “highly unreasonable.”

    The judge observed that the suit originally had four defendants but was later expanded without court’s permission to 10 defendants on Nov. 19, 2024, and further to 13 defendants on May 5.

    The judge held that based on these procedural irregularities and other factors, the suit lacked a reasonable cause of action and was dismissed accordingly.

    Justice Omotosho advised Omosebi to await judgment on his separate suit filed against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Olayemi Cardoso, and others, seeking £990 trillion claim.

    The judge, who highlighted the prevalence of similar cases pending in the court, seized the opportunity to addressed the legal community, especially the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), on the need to be cautious of such suits.

    “We can’t continue this way because the temple of justice is not open for everything,” he said.

    Omosebi, in a similar suit before Justice Omotosho, sued CBN governor and a number of commercial banks

    The judge had fixed June 4 for ruling on the preliminary objection of the defendants.

  • Alleged internet fraud: Court fixes July 2 for trial of 109 foreigners

    Alleged internet fraud: Court fixes July 2 for trial of 109 foreigners

    The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday, fixed July 2 for the trial of 109 foreigners, over alleged involvement in high-level cybercrime and hacking activities said to be threatening the nation’s security.

    The matter could not go on due to the absence of the trial judge, Justice Ekerete Akpan, in court. The judge was said to be on another official engagement.

    The case was the only matter on the day’s cause list. The court subsequently fixed July 2 and July 3 for trial.

    Recall Justice Akpan had, on Nov. 29, 2024, admitted the foreigners to a N1 billion bail with five suites.

    The judge, who granted them bail, directed that the five sureties must have a landed property worth N200, 000 million each.

    Justice Akpan directed that the sureties must deposit the original and verified documents of their landed property with the deputy registrar of the court.

    The judge also directed the sureties to deposit their international passports.

    While the male defendants were remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre, the court held that the female defendants should be kept at Keffi Correctional Centre in Nasarawa State pending the perfection of their bail terms.

    The defendants, who were arraigned on a six-count charge, all pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    The foreigners are said to be citizens of China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Brazil, Malaysia and Myanmar.

    They were, in 2024, arrested by the police.

    They were apprehended in their residence at Plot 1906, Cadestral Zone 807, Katampe District of Abuja, where they were said to be engaging in cybercrime by allegedly promoting “a fraudulent and unregistered gaming platform.”

    In a six-count charge, marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/599/2024 filed in the name of the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, the foreigners were charged with cybercrime, money laundering and unlawfully residing in Nigeria.

    In one of the counts, they were alleged to have aided, abetted, conspired among themselves “to commit an offence, to wit; cybercrime.”

    They were said to have commited the offence contrary to and punishable under Section 27 (1) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc) Act, 2015 (As Amended, 2024).

    They were also alleged to have accessed a computer, network and input with the intention that such inauthentic data will be considered or acted upon as If they were authentic or genuine.

    The offence is said to be contrary to and punishable under Section 13 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc) Act, 2015 (As Amended, 2024).

    Again, they were alleged to have  removed “from Nigeria proceeds generated from operating a fraudulent and unregistered gambling platforms.

    “These platforms are  9f.com, c2.top, 8pg.top and you thereby commit money laundering, contrary to and punishable under Section 18 of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.”

    The defendants were also accused of entering “the territory of the Federal Republic of Nigeria with a business permit of 30 days duration and failed to leave the Nigerian territory at the expiration of the said permit.

    The offence is contrary to Section 4 (2) and punishable under Section 44 (1) (c) of the Immigration Act 2015.”

  • Court orders final forfeiture of N1.3bn looted from Sterling Bank after mysterious glitch

    Court orders final forfeiture of N1.3bn looted from Sterling Bank after mysterious glitch

    Justice D.I. Dipeolu of the Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, has ordered the final forfeiture of N1,292,798,746.81 to the Federal Government of Nigeria, in favour of Sterling Bank Plc.

    The funds were fraudulently withdrawn by certain individuals following a system glitch experienced by Sterling Bank.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) launched an investigation after receiving a petition from Sterling Bank, which alleged the theft of approximately N2.5 billion.

    The investigation led to the tracing of N1.2 billion to various accounts, including: M Sharif Inter-Trading and Marketing Company Ltd – N900,000,000; Mustapha Abubakar – N255,872,842.84; Mustapha Sharif Abubakar – N12,195,093; Mustapha Sharif Abubakar (Jaiz Bank) – N41,119,917.13; Abubakar Mustapha Sharif – N19,069,567.73 and Mustapha Sharif Abubakar (Sterling Imal) – N30,850,158.12.

    The final forfeiture followed a motion filed on January 8, 2025, by the EFCC through its counsel, Hannatu U. KofarNaisa.

    KofarNaisa informed the court that the interim order was duly published in The Punch newspaper on March 24, 2025, and that no objections had been raised.

    She also argued that the funds were suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

    After reviewing the application and supporting documents, Justice Dipeolu ruled: “Having gone through the motion and attachments, I find the application meritorious and same is accordingly granted.”

    The court then issued a final forfeiture order of the N1.2 billion in favour of the Federal Government for the benefit of Sterling Bank Plc.

  • Court stops Ekiti PDP congresses

    Court stops Ekiti PDP congresses

    An Ekiti State High Court in Ado-Ekiti on Wednesday granted an order stopping the conduct of the Local Government and State Congresses of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the State.

    NAN reports that Justice E.B. Omotoso gave the order while ruling on a motion on exparte number HAD/424M/2025 filed by Mr Afolabi Adedeji.

    The suit was filed against the PDP, the party’s Acting National Chairman, Umar Damagun; National Organising Secretary, Umar Bature; Caretaker Chairman of the party in Ekiti state, Dare Adeleke and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The court ordered that all parties to the suit should maintain status quo, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

    The court also ordered that the PDP Acting National Chairman, National Organising Secretary and Ekiti State Caretaker Chairman should be served the court order through their WhatsApp numbers.

    “Leave is hereby granted to the claimant/applicant to serve the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants the Originating Process with its accompanying processes by substituted means, by pasting the afosesaid originating process on the wall of the 1st defendant’s office situate at Ajilosun Street, Ado Ekiti, Ekiti State.

    “In addition, the claimant/applicant is granted leave to serve the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants vide their WhatsApp phone numbers 08047677070, 08035961850 and 08033242822 respectively.

    “All parties in this case are hereby ordered to maintain status quo pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice which is hereby fixed for hearing on Wednesday, the 14th day of May, 2025,” the court ruled.

    The plaintiff, Afolabi Adedeji, had sought an order of interim injunction, retraining the defendants, privies, agents and successor-in-title/office, from accepting any list of persons who did not obtain election forms, participate in the elections and elected by the simple majority votes of the ward congress of the PDP in Ekiti State to act for the party, as delegates at any election of the party apart from those elected on March 15, 2025.

    The plaintiff also sought an order of the court to mark the originating summons as concurrent.

    He equally sought to issue and serve, the originating summons, and other accompany originating processes, and all other processes in the case on the 1st , 2nd, 3rd and 5th defendants, whose address is outside the jurisdiction of the court and in the Federal Capital Territory.

  • Court bars Nnamdi Kanu’s in-law from 3 proceedings over live streaming

    Court bars Nnamdi Kanu’s in-law from 3 proceedings over live streaming

    The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, banished Mrs Favour Kanu, wife of Prince Fineboy Kanu, the younger brother to Nnamdi Kanu for streaming the proceedings of the court live on her Facebook page.

    Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), is being prosecuted by the Federal Government for alleged terrorism charge.

    Justice James Omotosho, who gave the order, after Mrs Favour admitted engaging in the act and apologised to the court, held that Mrs Favour would have been charged for contempt of court.

    Although Kanu’s lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, also apologised on her behalf, Justice Omotosho insisted that Mrs Favour would be barred from three proceedings.

    The judge expressed surprise that despite that Mrs Favour’s phone was confiscated on the last adjourned date when she was caught recording him, she still went ahead to post the video online.

    ” I want to hear from her. Were you not the one that I took your phone?

    “I did not give order to forfeit that phone. I don’t know if she might be a wife to my brother (Nnamdi Kanu,” the judge said, but Prince told the judge that she is his wife.

    The judge, who cautioned against any act that could cause delay in the trial, assured all parties in the case that justice would be served.