TheNewsGuru

Tag: Trial

  • Dasuki’s trial adjourned till 2017

    The absence of Salisu Shuaibu, the 2nd defendant and former Director of Finance and Account (DFA) in the Office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) stalled proceedings in Sambo Dasuki’s case at FCT High Court, Maitama, Abuja.

    Dasuki, former NSA to former President Goodluck Jonathan, was arraigned before Justice Baba-Yusuf by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 19-count charge bordering on diversion of about N13.6 billion.

    He is being tried alongside Shuaibu Salisu, former DFA in the NSA Office, together with

    Aminu Baba-Kusa, former NNPC Executive Director.

    Also tried were two firms — Acacia Holding Ltd. and Reliance Referral Hospital Ltd.

    At the resumed sitting on Wednesday, the prosecuting counsel, Oluwaleke Atolagbe, said he had been served with the medical report of the 2nd defendant confirming that he (Salisu Shuaibu) had been hospitalised.

    Atolagbe also told the court that the trial could not proceed in the absence of the second defendant and therefore applied for a short adjournment pending the recovery of the defendant.

    Shuaibu’s Counsel, Mr Adetayo Adeyemo, also apologised to the court that his client could not be in court because of illness.

    He told Justice Baba-Yusuf that the medical report of his client had already been made available to the court, the prosecution and other parties in the trial.

    Counsel to other defendants did not object to the application for an adjournment.

    Thereafter, Justice Baba-Yusuf noted that since the charge was filed, the second defendant had always been in court and for that reason, the court is obliged to grant the request for the adjournment.

    He then adjourned trial until Jan. 25.

    Meanwhile, the second charge referred from Justice Peter Affen to Justice Baba-Yusuf was similarly adjourned until Jan. 24 for re-arraignment.

    Salisu Shuaibu is the 3rddefendant in that matter also.

    In the matter before Justice Peter Affen, Dauski is the second defendant, while Amb. Bashir Yuguda is the first defendant.

    Others are Dalhatu Investment Ltd., Sagir Attahiru and Attahiru Bafaarawa, former governor of Sokoto State.

    They were arraigned on a 22-count charge bordering on conspiracy, bribery and abuse of office and criminal breach of trust to the tune of N28,315 million.

  • Court adjourns Justice Ngwuta’s trial

    Court adjourns Justice Ngwuta’s trial

    The criminal trial of Justice Sylvester Ngwuta by the Federal High Court, Abuja was on Wednesday stalled on allegation of untimely service of `trial processes’ on the defence team.

    Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), the defence lead counsel had filed an oral motion seeking adjournment in order to avail him of documentary evidence brought against Ngwuta.

    The presiding judge, Justice John Tsoho held that the new Administration of Criminal Justice Act allowed five adjournments on instances of parties.

    He also said Section 396 of the Act gave wider room for persons charged for criminal offence to be availed the allowance to prepare for trial.

    “This opportunity also extends to the psychological and emotion disposition of the defendant.

    “However, no defendant that is worth his or her salt would allow criminal charges to hang around him or her. This application has merit and it is upheld.

    “The defence team is obliged time to use this period to study the charges, evidence and all other document related to the case.”

    Tsoho added: “the trial is adjourned to run between Jan.18 and Jan. 23’’.

    Agabi had said that the prosecution team served him with the complete process few days ago, adding that he required time to under study the document.

    Mr Philips Adeogun, the prosecuting counsel, opposed the application, as according to him, the defence’s team was served all relevant processes required to kick start the trial.

    “It was based on the assurance that we had satisfied our obligations that we brought our witnesses to court.

    “Indeed, we are taken aback that the defendant counsel would move this retrogressive motion. We pray the court to dismiss it.

    “After all the Administration of Criminal Justice Act compels accelerated hearing of criminal matters such as this,’’ he said.

    Recall that Ngwuta was on Nov. 21, 2016 arraigned before the court on a 16-count charge including alleged money laundering and judicial misconduct.

    Ngwuta, a suspended Justice of the Supreme Court, however, pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

    Recall also that Ngwuta, his colleague, Justice Inyang Okoro, and five other federal judges had been suspended on allegations of fraud.

    The Department of State Services raided their homes on Oct. 7 and Oct. 8 and allegedly discovered large sums of money.

    In the charge sheet, the prosecution stated that Ngwuta illegally retained N35, 358, 000.00, contrary to the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011.

    The prosecution also accused the judge of illegally retaining in his possession 319,596.00 dollars and 25, 915 pounds among others.

  • Ex-Lagos Speaker, Ikuforiji to face fresh trial for alleged N500 million fraud

    Ex-Lagos Speaker, Ikuforiji to face fresh trial for alleged N500 million fraud

    The Court of Appeal, Lagos, has set aside the ruling of a Federal High Court that cleared former Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Adeyemi Ikuforiji, and his aide, Oyebode Atoyebi, of money laundering charges.

    The appellate court in a unanimous judgment set aside the verdict of the trial judge, Ibrahim Buba, and declared that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had made out a prima facie case against the accused.

    In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Biobela Georgewill, the court also ordered that trial should start ‘de novo’ (afresh) before another judge other than Justice Buba, in light of the far-reaching findings already made by him.

    Other members of the three-member panel include Justice Side Bage and Justice Ugochukwu Ogakwu.

    The News Agency of Nigeria recalls that Justice Buba, had on September 26, 2014, discharged Messrs. Ikuforiji and Atoyebi of a 56-count charge of conspiracy and laundering the sum of N500 million belonging to the Assembly.

    The offences, according to the EFCC, contravenes the provisions of Sections 15 (1d) and 16(1d) of Money Laundry Act, MLA, 2004 and 2011.

    The trial Judge, who discharged the Speaker and Mr. Atoyebi, while ruling on a no-case submission filed by the accused persons held that the EFCC failed to establish a prima-facie case against them.

    Dissatisfied with the ruling, the EFCC through its counsel, Godwin Obla, filed the Notice of Appeal dated September 30, 2014.

    Mr. Obla asked the Court of Appeal to hold that Justice Buba erred in law when he held that counts two to 48 were incompetent because they were filed pursuant to Section 1(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004 which was repealed by an Act in 2011.

    The EFCC further argued that the lower court erred in law when it held that the provisions of Section 1 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004 and 2011 only applied to natural persons and corporate bodies other than government.

    The commission also submitted that the trial judge erred in law when he held and concluded that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses supported the innocence of the respondents.

    Justice Georgewill in his lead judgment held that the offences created by Section 1 of the MLA 2004 and 2011 respectively were strict liability offences.

    The judge also said that their proof does not depend on the purposes the money was used for if the amount was above the threshold stipulated by law.

    “Regrettably, the court below went on a voyage of its own, discussing cash payment of million made to the Super Eagles in Brazil, even without any scintilla of evidence before it, instead of remaining focused on the issue at hand.

    “Does the fact that all persons likely to have committed a particular alleged offence have not been prosecuted become a reason for the court to decline jurisdiction of one of them being prosecuted? certainly not.

    “I consider many of the issues raised so randomly by the court below as irrelevant and inconsequential to the just determination of the question before it, which is, whether the appellant made out a prima facie case.

    “Very worrisome to me, is the attitude of the court below, considering between the decision of this court and its own decision on which one to follow, even when its attention was called to the decision of this court.

    “I find this attitude quite bizarre and not in sync with judicial attitude toward the time honoured doctrine of stare decisis. It is pure rascality, impertinence and disregard for judicial hierarchy in this country.

    “In light of my finding above, I have no difficulty resolving the sole issue for determination in the negative against the respondents in favour of the appellant.

    “I hold firmly therefore, that the appeal has merit and ought to be allowed; the ruling of the lower court is hereby set aside,” Justice Georgewill held.