NEWS AGENCY OF NIGERIA
Alleged N47bn fraud: EFCC arraigns ex-Abia Gov, Orji, son, others

Alleged N47bn fraud: EFCC arraigns ex-Abia Gov, Orji, son, others

330 total views today

By Leonard Okachie

A High Court sitting in Abia has granted former two-term Gov. Theodore Orji, his son, and three others bail in the sum of N50 million over an alleged N47 billion fraud.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Friday, arraigned the former governor, and his son, Chinedum, a former Speaker of the State House of Assembly, and Dr Philip Nto, a former Commissioner for Finance.

The others are a government contractor, Obioma King, and a former Director of Finance in the state, Romanus Madu.

The defendants are facing a 16-count charge related to the alleged misappropriation of N47 billion.

EFCC alleged that the defendants conspired to steal and converted about N47 billion meant for various state programmes as contained in the charge sheet No: HU/69C/2024.

The prosecution alleged that the defendants misappropriated N22.5 billion, allocated as security vote from 2011 to 2015.

The prosecution told the court that the defendants allegedly stole N13 billion from a loan facility granted by Diamond Bank, as well as illegal conversion of N12 billion from the Paris Club refund.

The defendants are also being accused of committing unlawful act and abuse of office to the tune of the sum of N10.5 billion, being the proceeds of the loan facility granted by First Bank Plc for the benefits of Abia Government.

The defendants also allegedly stole and converted the sum of N2 billion being the proceeds of the Central Bank of Nigeria Funds for Small and Medium Enterprises allocated to the state.

The defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Justice Lilian Abai granted the defendants bail in the sum of N50 million and adjourned the case until June 18 and June 19, for prosecution to open its case. (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Abdulfatai Beki/Kevin Okunzuwa

TAF Africa CEO Jake Epelle testifies against Emirates over rights breach

TAF Africa CEO Jake Epelle testifies against Emirates over rights breach

369 total views today

By Taiye Agbaje

Mr Jake Epelle, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of The Albino Foundation (TAF) Africa on Thursday, testified in his N150 million suit filed against Emirates Airline.

Epelle gave his evidence as sole witness before Justice Musa Liman of a Federal High Court in Abuja over allegations bordering on the breach of his fundamental human rights by the airline.

Led in evidence by his lawyer, Regina Okotie-Eboh, Epelle identified his witness statement on oath dated March 18, 2024, and adopted it as his evidence-in-chief.

Okotie-Eboh also tendered Epelle’s international passport, the boarding pass, the flight ticket, the letters from Stanford Medicine, also known as Stanford Healthcare; the email message and the ticket purchases from Emirates Airline as evidence in the case.

The lawyer equally tendered the flight ticket from Delta Airline, another letter from Stanford University School of Medicine, a letter from the plaintiff’s counsel demanding N150 million damages from Emirates Airline, and another letter from plaintiff’s counsel to Epelle in respect of fees for filing the suit, among others, as evidence.

The lawyer to the Emirates Airline, Michael Dedon, did not object to tendering all the documents and Justice Liman admitted them in evidence and marked them as exhibits in the suit.

When Okotie-Eboh asked Epelle what he wanted from the court, the TAF CEO said: “I want this honourable court to grant my reliefs.”

Dedon, while cross examining the witness, said Epelle should know as a regular traveller that holding a visa of a country, does not guarantee anyone an entry into the destination country.

Responding, Epelle, though admitted Dedon’s statement, he however clarified that the process of stopping an individual from entering a country should be the responsibility of the embassy staff and not the airline.

“It is the embassy staff that will come there and cancel my visa and tell me not to go. But this did not happen,” he said.

The witness said the Emirate Airline did not show him any tangible evidence why he was denied access into the U.S.

According to him, it was just a mere information.

When the lawyer told him if he agreed with him that admission into a foreign country is at the discretion of immigration officers attending to the immigrant, Epelle insisted that it was not the US immigration officers that denied him access into the country.

“Just from your words, it is the immigration officers, by themselves at the point of entry that will turn you back. But this was not the case.”

He said it was the Emirates airline that stopped him from proceeding on his journey.

He said even when he came back to the US Embassy in Nigeria for clarification, the officer who attended to him confirmed that his name was not on the restriction list.

“I turned down the US green card because of the people I represent in the country.

“I hold a UN status; I am the UN Ambassador for Albinism. I am a human rights defender and I won the Franco-German Prize for Human Rights and the Rule of Law,” he said.

Epelle, who broke down in tears in the witness box, said there was no reason the US would have denied him access into the country.

“My lord, it is so traumatic because any time this case comes up, it takes my memory back to what Emirates Airline did to me,” he said.

When Dedon asked Epelle if he was given any document from the US Embassy to show to the court that his name was not on the restriction list, he said diplomatically, the embassy would not have given him any documents.

He, however, said that the embassy worker showed him from their system to confirm that there was no email from the US Immigration and Border Control stopping him from entering the country.

He said it was the embassy worker who advised him to board Delta Airline back to the US.

“Look, I am a skin cancer patient. Emirates Airline would have just killed me for nothing,” he said, weeping.

Justuce Liman adjourned the matter until March 27 for defence to open their case.

Earlier before the case proceed, Okotie-Eboh informed the court that Epelle was indisposed.

The lawyer, who said Epelle came from the hospital bed to give evidence, prayed the court to allow the hearing proceed because the matter had been dragging since 2021 when it was filed.

“The matter was adjourned for hearing and our sole witness is around. He has been on admission but he is ready to give evidence,” she had said.

The judge, however, asked Epelle if the matter could be adjourned to allow him attend to his health but he agreed to go on with the matter.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Epelle, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1285/2021, sued Emirates Airline as the sole defendant.

In his statement of claim, the TAF Africa CEO alleged that on Dec. 20, 2020, he was billed to travel on a medical trip to San Francisco, U.S.

He averred that upon being issued with the boarding passes to San Francisco. he alongside his colleague, Mrs Green Mary Ibitoru, boarded flight No EK 785 from the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport Abuja to Dubai, United Arab Emirates (U.A.E).

He alleged that upon arrival at the Dubai International Airport, on Dec. 20, 2020, he sought to board the next flight to Boston as already scheduled but was denied access to board the Emirate Airline.

Ekpelle said he was informed by the airline staff at their connecting desk in Dubai International Airport, Dubai that the United States of America (USA) Border Control sent a mail to them via electronic mail (email) requesting that he should be denied access to board their flight to Boston.

He said he kept demanding for the reason for being denied access to board the flight to Boston but was not given any except the one reason which was that the U.S. Border Control sent a mail to the defendant stating that the plaintiff be denied access to board the defendant’s flight to Boston.

He, however, said that he was never shown any mail from the US Boarder Control denying him access to board the defendant’s flight to Boston.

He said regardless of his insistence of not having any travel restriction, no criminal records and not been politically exposed, Emirate Airline did nothing to confirm his position.

He said some friends and persons who recognised him at the Dubai International Airport were embarrassed and thought he had been denied boarding for something related to crime, while others joined in confronting and pleading with the defendant to allow him board the flight to Boston but all to no avail.

Ekpelle said the airline’s refusal to allow him to board the flight to Boston caused him to miss the appointment with the dermatologists for his surgery.

The plaintiff averred that due to the missed surgery, he suffered untold hardships and pain that would not have been if the trip had not been aborted and the surgery had been carried out as initially scheduled.

According to him, the defendant’s act of refusing me access to board, caused me added inconvenience as I returned to Nigeria without my luggage as the luggage had been tagged with the luggage of the said colleague.

He said his ticket to Boston and San-Francisco was seized and one of the tickets was used to escort him on board Emirates Airline which brought him back to Abuja on December 20, 2020.

Ekpelle said he paid N886,751.00 to the airline as the air fare for a return trip from Abuja, Nigeria to San-Francisco en-route Dubai and Boston and from San Francisco (USA) to Abuja, Nigeria en-route New York and Dubai after which he was issued a flight ticket.

He said on his return to Abuja, he immediately visited the American Embassy where he met the Head of Mission and informed her about his ordeal at the hands of the defendant’s airlines in Dubai.

He said he was told that no restriction was placed on him as at Dec. 20, 2020 and that no instruction was given by the USA Boarder Control or any of the USA Consulate preventing him from entering USA.

He averred that after he was graciously booked for another surgical appointment by his dermatologist, he travelled back to Stanford Health Care in San Francisco through Delta Airline for the medical treatment.

He, therefore, sought a declaration that the failure of the Emirate Airline to allow him board the flight to Boston from Dubai was a breach of the contract of carriage between the duo.

He sought a declaration that in all circumstances of the case, the acts of the defendant in refusing the plaintiff access to board the defendant’s flight to Boston from Dubai is unjust and an infringement of the plaintiff’s right.

Ekpelle, therefore, sought an order, directing the airline to pay N150 million as general damages for the hardship, suffering, trauma, humiliation and embarrassment he suffered.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

Judicial system: NDPC calls for data protection awareness

Judicial system: NDPC calls for data protection awareness

364 total views today

By Ijeoma Olorunfemi

The Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC), says data protection awareness is important for the judiciary system to secure equal rights for data-related matters.

Dr Vincent Olatunji, National Commissioner, NDPC, said this in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Abuja.

NAN reports that NDPC had in a statement said it has concluded plans to partner National Judicial Institute (NJI) to ensure data protection in the judicial system.

The statement was issued by the commission’s Head of Media, Mr Itunu Dosekun.

Justifying the move, Olatunji told NAN that the judicial system needed to be abreast with the requirements of data protection so as to avert injustice in data-related cases.

“We are in an era of disruptive technologies and a lot of people are on the digital space and the way one is treated affects others.

“We expect that justice on issues of data protection should be tripartite in nature, such that judgement in the entire spectrum does not affect the right of others.

“Decisions on enjoyment of data privacy rights in relation to one citizen have fundamental implications on all citizens,’’ he said.

Olatunji further said that countries globally were putting adequate measures in place to ensure enforceable data protection rights as well as to establish data protection authorities to enforce data protection laws.

The national commissioner also said that in the digital age the protection of the privacy of all citizens worldwide was paramount. (NAN) (http://www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Uche Anunne

Court exonerates Naira Marley, Sam Larry of Mohbad’s death

Court exonerates Naira Marley, Sam Larry of Mohbad’s death

316 total views today

By Adenike Ayodele

A Sabo-Yaba Magistrate Court on Tuesday discharged Abdulazeez Fashola, (alias Naira Marley) and his ally Samson Eletu (alias Samlarry) in connection with the death of a Nigerian artist, Ilerioluwa Aloba, (alias Mohbad).

The court said, instead, it was a nurse, Feyisayo Ogedengbe and Ayobami Sadiq that should be prosecuted for Mohbad’s death due to alleged recklessness and negligence.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Magistrate, Mrs E. Kubeinje, said the ruling was on the advice of the state’s Department of Public Prosecution (DPP) signed by one Dr Babajide Martins.

The magistrate said the DPP had advised the court to strike out the names of Naira Marley, Sam Larry, Owodunni Ibrahim (alias Primeboy) and Mohbad’s manager,  Babatunde Opere for lack of evidence linking them to the death of Mohbad.

Kubeinje said that the DPP had a prima facie case of the offence of reckless and negligent acts, contrary to Section 251(e) of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State, 2015, against Ogedengbe and Sadiq, respectively.

She said that the court agreed that an unlawful assault was carried out by Naira Marley, Sam Larry, Opere, and Primeboy on Mohbad but the assault could not rise to the point of criminal responsibility in view of the deceased.

Kubeinje added that Mohbad had also previously withdrawn his complaint against Naira Marley, dated Oct. 11, 2022, on assault, on the grounds that the matter had been settled amicably.

According to her, hence, the defendants have no case to answer.

The court, thereafter, ruled that Ogedengbe and Sadiq should be prosecuted for the offence of recklessness and negligence, which is contrary to Section 251(e) of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State, 2015.

She also ruled that Sam Larry, Naira Marley, Primeboy, and Babatunde respectively have no case to answer in view of the demise of the deceased.

Kubeinje said that the defendants should be released if still in custody.

The magistrate adjourned the case until March 24 for an update in view of the ruling. (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Joe Idika

Lawyers list paths to curbing foreigners’ involvement in crime

Lawyers list paths to curbing foreigners’ involvement in crime

250 total views today

 

 

 

 

By Adenike Ayodele/Ngozi Njoku

Some Lagos lawyers have attributed the recent rise in crime by foreigners to weak laws, poor investigations by security agencies, and other systemic failures in the country.

 

The lawyers expressed their views in separate interviews with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Sunday in Lagos.

 

They spoke following a sting operation in Lagos by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in December 2024.

 

The landmark raid, led by Mr Ola Olukoyede, Executive Chairman of the EFCC, resulted in the arrest of 792 suspects, including 197 foreigners, over alleged crypto fraud and romance scams.

 

The foreigners accused of cryptocurrency investment fraud included 148 Chinese, 40 Filipinos, two Kazakhs, one Pakistani, and one Indonesian.

 

Following their arrests, they are being arraigned in batches before various High Courts in Lagos.

 

Dr Yemi Omodele, a lawyer, said the rise in crime stemmed from weak laws, poor investigations, unemployment, corruption, and delays in justice delivery.

 

He noted that law enforcement agencies often fail to conduct proper investigations, leading to prosecutors losing cases in court.

 

According to him, many youths are unemployed and turn to quick money schemes, such as cybercrime, commonly known as “yahoo, yahoo.”

 

He also cited corruption as a significant factor in the rising crime rate in Nigeria.

 

The lawyer emphasised the need for collective efforts to rid the country of criminals and prevent it from becoming “a crime depot.”

 

He said: “Foreigners read and hear about crime trends and realise they can navigate the system due to its weaknesses, encouraging them to engage in illegal activities.

 

“Our criminal justice system needs reform, with harsher penalties for offenders.

 

“Law enforcement must ensure transparency in investigations, and judges should deliver timely judgments,” he said.

 

He added that any foreigner found guilty should have their visa revoked, be banned for life, jailed, and later repatriated to serve the remainder of their sentence.

 

Omodele urged the government to create job opportunities for youths and graduates to prevent them from being exploited in criminal activities.

 

Mrs Jumoke Ajayi, another lawyer, attributed rising crime among foreigners to poor immigration controls and lax entry requirements.

 

She argued that Nigeria’s immigration process is less rigorous than in many other countries, making it an easy destination for foreigners.

 

She highlighted the lack of proper records and monitoring, which allows foreigners to move freely without oversight, contributing to the crime rate.

 

“Foreigners see Nigeria as having inadequate security compared to other countries. This perception emboldens them to engage in criminal activities.

 

“When some of them arrive, they compare security levels and find opportunities to commit crimes, either independently or by joining local criminals,” she said.

 

She disagreed with calls for amending criminal laws, stating that existing laws are sufficient but need stronger enforcement.

 

Ajayi suggested better documentation for citizens and non-citizens, similar to systems in developed nations.

 

She stressed that laws should be enforced so that everyone understands no one is above the law.

 

However, she insisted that security agencies must be equipped with modern tools to carry out their duties effectively.

 

Mr Kehinde Nubi, Principal Counsel at Kehinde Nubi and Associates, welcomed the arraignment of the 197 foreigners, describing it as a step in the right direction.

 

According to him, crime involving foreigners is increasing due to various factors.

 

He pointed to Nigeria’s harsh economic conditions, high unemployment, and poverty as key drivers of crime, particularly among the youth.

 

“Young people, being more tech-savvy, engage in cybercrime. Unfortunately, corruption often allows them to evade justice,” he said.

 

He added that Nigeria may lack the technological capability to counter sophisticated cybercriminals.

 

Nubi noted that media reports on these crimes damage Nigeria’s reputation, portraying it as a haven for criminals.

 

In spite of this, he said Nigeria remains attractive for investment due to its large market and opportunities, making it easy for foreign criminals to operate undetected.

 

“It is logical that foreigners want a share of the criminal activities, sometimes collaborating with locals or working alone,” he said.

 

He suggested that foreigners might perceive Nigeria’s laws as easy to evade, which emboldens them to commit crimes.

 

Nigeria’s cybercrime laws, he said, should be updated to address emerging threats by closing loopholes, imposing stricter penalties, and improving asset forfeiture and extradition processes.

 

However, he noted that enforcing existing laws effectively would significantly reduce crime.

 

Nubi stressed the need for immigration authorities to monitor foreign entrants closely to prevent criminals from exploiting the system.

 

“We already have enough criminals within Nigeria to deal with,” he said.

 

He further argued that socio-economic inequality fuels crime, urging the government to address these disparities.

 

“The ruling class must do better. They should not create an impression that success is only possible through illicit means,” he said. (NAN) (www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Chinyere Nwachukwu / Kamal Tayo Oropo

EFCC arraigns foreigners over alleged cybercrime

EFCC arraigns foreigners over alleged cybercrime

405 total views today

Cybercrime
By Sandra Umeh

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Thursday,  arraigned several foreign nationals before a Federal High Court in Lagos for alleged cybercrime and attempt to destabilise the nation.

The defendants, who include Filipinos, Indonesian, and Chinese nationals, are standing trial before Justice Musa Kakaki, on a two-count charge bordering on cybercrime, and identity theft.

The defendants are, Kayceelyn Remorin, Jonylyn Agulto, Donny Hermanto, Guo Bin, Darwa Esmael, Lari Tayac, Jhena Samiento, Jessa Sai Chui, Rain Torida, and Kimbaley Nisperos.

Others are, Winnie De Jesus, Shairah Reyes, Gladys Joy, May Iba, Jean Calaga, Huo Wen Jie, Zhao Sui Tao, Gong Yua, and Anjeannet Topacio.

The defendants, all pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The prosecutor, Mr N.K. Ukoha, urged the court to also enter a plea of not guilty, against a company, Genting Internation C.O. Ltd, also allegedly linked to the charge, but not represented by counsel.

Following the defendants’ plea, the prosecutor urged the court to remand them in a correctional facility, pending trial.

But the Defence Counsel, Mrs Bridget Omoteno, raised objection, and urged the court to grant a short adjournment to enable parties explore plea bargain option.

Kakaki, however, granted the prosecutor’s request and ordered the remand of the defendants in custody of the correctional service, pending trial.

The Judge adjourned the case until the March 18 and March 20, for trial.

According to the charge, the defendants and the company allegedly committed the offence on Dec. 18, 2024, in Lagos.

They were said to have wilfully caused to be accessed, computer systems organised to seriously destabilise the economic and social structure of Nigeria, when they procured Nigerian youths for identity theft.

They were alleged to have done so, with the intent to gain financial advantage for themselves.

The offences, according to the prosecutor, contravene the provisions of sections 18, 22, and 27 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition) Act, 2015 (as amended) (NAN)

Edited by Kevin Okunzuwa

ECOWAS Court orders Nigeria to pay N52m to eviction victims

ECOWAS Court orders Nigeria to pay N52m to eviction victims

396 total views today

By Mark Longyen

The ECOWAS Court has ordered Nigeria to pay two million naira compensation each to 26 people who were forcibly evicted from various communities in Lagos and Rivers between 2004 and 2013.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the applicants, Mr Edwin Lenyie and 25 others had filed the suit No: ECW/CCJ/APP/34/17), seeking the enforcement of their fundamental human rights.

They also prayed the court to compel the Nigerian government to pay them compensation for forcefully evicting them from their communities without prior notice, compensation, or alternative shelter, rendering them homeless.

Delivering judgment on Thursday, the court held that the Nigerian government failed in its responsibility to ensure access to legal remedies for the victims.

According to the community court, the action of the Nigerian government was in violation of Article 7 of the African Charter Charter on Human and People’s Rights.

It held that the Applicants’ rights under Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), which guarantees the right to a fair trial and access to justice, were violated.

The court said that the hearings on the matter, which were held by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) “were never concluded, and no alternative means of redress were provided for them”.

“Inspite of initial hearings by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in 2014, the proceedings were suspended indefinitely, leaving the Applicants without legal recourse,” the court said.

The court further dismissed Nigeria’s objections that the Applicants should have pursued their claims in Nigerian courts and on jurisdiction, saying it had the locus standi to entertain the case.

It further struck out the NHRC as a respondent in the case, and ordered that the Federal Government must bear full responsibility for the actions of its agencies.

The three-member panel of the court which has Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding); Sengu Koroma (judge rapporteur); and Gberi-Bè Ouattara (member) held that the compensation/reparation would ensure that justice is served to the victims.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

ECOWAS Court dismisses suit against FG over shrine destruction

ECOWAS Court dismisses suit against FG over shrine destruction

373 total views today

By Mark Longyen

The ECOWAS Court on Thursday dismissed a suit filed by a Nigerian woman, Lovina Adonor, seeking to compel the Federal Government to pay her reparation for the destruction of her shrine.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Adonor, a self-acclaimed priestess, had filed the suit marked: ECW/CCJ/APP/61/22, seeking the enforcement of her fundamental human rights against Nigeria.

Adonor had in her submission claimed that her shrine was attacked and vandalised by some private individuals, forcing her to flee the community due to threats to her life.

She also alleged that the Nigerian government failed to provide adequate protection, investigate her complaints, or address the destruction of her religious materials and property.

According to the applicant, the incident was tantamount to the violation of her right to propagate her religion, the right to security, and the right to own property without discrimination.

She had argued that such violated rights were encapsulated under ECOWAS basic texts and international human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR).

Delivering judgment, however, Justice Sengu Koroma, the Judge Rapporteur, declined to grant the applicant’s prayer for any reparations or order for perpetual injunction against the respondent.

The court held that Adonor failed to establish a direct connection between the alleged violation of her rights and the Nigerian government or its agents.

The court further held that Nigeria had adequately investigated the complaints, while the individuals responsible for the alleged acts were private citizens, who had been detained and later released after due process.

“Additionally, the Applicant’s claims under Article 3, 6, 12, 14, and 21 of the ACHPR are dismissed for lack of facts sufficient and evidence to warrant relief sought thereunder.

“Furthermore, the National laws, such as Section 43 of the Nigerian Constitution, are outside of the Court competence,” the court said.

The court explained that after reviewing both parties’ submissions, it affirmed its jurisdiction to entertain the suit because the case pertained to alleged human rights violations within an ECOWAS member state.

It added that the application was admissible, because the Applicant had sufficiently demonstrated her victim status, and also met the necessary procedural requirements.

The three-member panel of the court which has Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding); Sengu Koroma (rapporteur); and Edward Asante (member), ordered that both parties would bear their own costs.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

Man who allegedly burnt wife, brother-in-law to death knows fate Feb. 27

Man who allegedly burnt wife, brother-in-law to death knows fate Feb. 27

429 total views today

Judgment

By Adenike Ayodele

A Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS) has reserved judgment until Feb. 27 in the case of a 50-year-old man, Benjamin Ogudoro, who allegedly burnt his wife and brother-in-law to death.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the judgment, which was slated for Feb. 13, before Justice Sherifat Sonaike, could not be read for undisclosed reasons.

Sonaike, thereafter, adjourned the judgment until Feb.27.

Ogundoro was arraigned on Dec. 7, 2022 by the Lagos State Government on a four-count charge bordering on murder.

The prosecution alleged the defendant killed his wife, Chinyere, who had just returned from Scotland and her brother, Ifeanyi, by setting them ablaze.

The prosecution said the incident happened on April 1, 2022, about 3.30 a.m, at House 5, Zone 7, Oteyi Garden Estate, Abule Ado in the Amuwo Odofin area of Lagos.

The state alleged that the defendant poured petrol on the bodies of his wife, his brother-in-law, the mattress and set them ablaze while they were asleep.

According to the prosecution, the alleged offences violated Sections 223 and 341 of the criminal law of Lagos State, 2015. (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Joe Idika

Counsel file several objections to charge against Otudeko, others

Counsel file several objections to charge against Otudeko, others

375 total views today

By Sandra Umeh

Counsel in the case of alleged fraud preferred against the Chairman of Honeywell Group, Oba Otudeko, on Thursday, filed several preliminary objections to the suit before the Federal High Court in Lagos.

The preliminary objections are from Otudeko and others charged along with him.

The applications included those challenging the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the case, those asking for stay of arraignment, and those seeking quashing of the charge.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) preferred a 13-count charge against Otudeko and a former Managing Director of First Bank Plc., Olabisi Onasanya.

Also charged is a former member of the board of Honeywell Group, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

The N6.2 billion fraud charge is marked FHC/L/20C/2025 and before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke.

NAN reports that the case was scheduled for arraignment on Jan. 20, but the defendants were absent on the grounds that the EFCC had not served them with the charge.

Their counsel had argued that they only got “wind” of the case on the pages of newspapers.

The court consequently directed service of the charge by substituted means, and adjourned the case.

On Thursday, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN) announced appearance for EFCC and Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) announced appearance for Otudeko, while Mr Olasupo Shashore (SAN) appeared for Onasanya.

Mr Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN) appeared for Akintayo, while Mr Ade Adedeji (SAN) aanounced appearance for Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

Mr Babajide Koku (SAN) announced appearance for the nominal complainant, First Bank of Nigeria.

Olanipekun informed the court of an application he filed on behalf of Otudeko and dated Jan. 28 which, he said, was served on EFCC on Jan. 29.

He also told the court that there was an affidavit dated Feb. 1 which gave details of Otudeko’s absence in court.

Other defence counsel briefly introduced their applications before the court.

In response, EFCC counsel, told the court that he had complied with the court’s directive on substituted service of the charge on the first, third and fourth defendants and had attached a proof of service.

He also told the court that he received processes from Olanipekun confirming that Otudeko was not within the court’s jurisdiction.

Oyedepo added that he received a “harvest of motions” from defence counsel in the suit, objecting to the suit.

He said it was important to know when the parties could return to the court for arraignment of the defendants since the first defendant was absent.

In response, Olanipekun informed the court that he had served an application on the prosecution on behalf of Otudeko, adding that EFCC had seven days to reply.

He argued that a court had to, first, decide whether it had jurisdiction to entertain the case.

He urged the court to give a date for hearing of the defendants’ applications.

In response, Oyedepo argued that the arraignment of the defendants ought to be taken first before any applications.

He cited the Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of Yahaya Bello as well as the provisions of Section 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.

He submitted that the court should adjourn the case for arraignment of the defendants.

In further response, Olanipekun argued that it was important for the parties to refrain from “pulling cases by a strand of hair”.

Citing judicial authorities decided after the enactment of the ACJA, including Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) versus Idahosa and Shema Ibrahim versus FRN, he argued that the court dispensed with the appearance of the defendants in both cases.

On his part, counsel to the third defendant, Ogunwumiju, also argued that it was important for the court to first take the objection by  defence in the interest of justice.

Citing the provisions of Edet versus State as well as Section 412(3) of the ACJA, he submitted that arraigning the defendants before hearing their objections would be prejudicial.

In the same vein, counsel to the second defendant, Shashore, urged the court to hear the applications of defence.

According to him, the fourth defendant seeks an application staying arraignment, and another quashing the charge.

He argued that it would be unfair to insist that the court would take the  defendants’ pleas to a charge that might be quashed.

He added that it was important for the court to first decide whether there was merit in doing same.

Counsel to the fourth defendant, Adedeji, argued on the authority of Nwadike versus FRN that court processes must not be made to oppress citizens.

He argued that the case of Yahaya Bello as cited by prosecution was not relevant to the suit, neither was the provisions of Section 396(3) of ACJA.

Adedeji said that the defendants ought not to face fraud trial for a civil transaction.

In reply, Oyedepo said that the cases as cited by defence counsel were out of context and did not reflect the charge.

He urged the court to make an order directing Otudeko to be present in court on the next adjourned date.

At this point, Olanipekun informed the court that Otudeko was under medical review and was advised to remain in the United Kingdom until a comprehensive review and medical advice.

He urged the court not to make such an order, but to adjourn the case for hearing of the applications.

The judge adjourned the case until March 17 for ruling on the arguments. (NAN) (www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Chidinma Agu/Ijeoma Popoola

X
Welcome to NAN
Need help? Choose an option below and let me be your assistant.
Email SubscriptionSite SearchSend Us Email