Connect with us

News

How FG Made Nnamdi Kanu Flee Nigeria – Lawyer, Ejimakor

Published

on

Aloy Ejimakor, lawyer to Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, has disclosed that the agitator is ready to prove to the world that he did not jump bail in 2017.

Speaking exclusively with DAILY POST, the lawyer said the IPOB leader will prove that the Nigerian government made him flee Nigeria.

Ejimakor said the military invasion of Kanu’s residence and threat to his life made him unable to attend his trials and flee Nigeria.

Kanu was arrested and arraigned in court for charges bordering on treason in 2017.

Justice Binta Nyako of an Abuja Federal High Court had granted him bail in 2017.

Kanu, however, failed to continue his trial after a military invasion of his home in Afaraukwu, Abia State.

After the military invasion, the IPOB leader fled the country to Europe, where he operated and coordinated his agitation for Biafra from.

Few weeks ago, he was captured by the Nigerian government in an African country believed to be Kenya and repatriated to Nigeria to continue his trial before Justice Nyako.

Upon his return, Justice Nyako had ordered that he should be remanded in the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS.

Amid this, there have been wild speculations that Kanu jumped bail in 2017.

However, Ejimakor dismissed the claims of jumping bail, stressing that the threat to Kanu’s life made him flee the country.

Ejimakor said: “Despite what he has passed through, Nnamdi Kanu was in high spirits when I met with him yesterday, July 17; and he is looking forward to the first opportunity to debunk this whole story of him jumping bail. To date, he has never had such an opportunity even as he had previously requested it in the proper forum.

“In my considered view, Kanu never jumped bail, something made him to flee Nigeria and not attend his trial in October in 2017.

Biafra: Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer gives update on IPOB leader’s condition in DSS custody

“That something was the military invasion of his homestead, which was subsequently brought to the attention of the court in an application that was never heard to this day.

“So, perhaps, this whole unfortunate incident would provide the first opportunity to ventilate this nagging question of jumping bail, as it will easily be shown that Kanu never made a voluntary decision not to attend his trial. Jumping bail takes some sort of voluntary act on the part of the defendant.

“Kanu’s case is purely a case of involuntary act or omission brought by the actions of the Nigerian government that had him on trial and thus held an abiding legal interest for him to remain in Nigeria to take his trial. In truth, it is the same Nigerian government that claims Kanu jumped bail and thus seeks to benefit from it that destroyed Kanu’s capacity or duty to appear at his trial.

“On the preponderance of the evidence, it would be unreasonable for anybody to conclude that Kanu jumped bail. It’s not a case of jumping bail simpliciter. Rather, it is a clear case of an adverse party forcing Kanu to flee, only to turn around and accuse him of jumping bail.

“If you get over the issue of Kanu jumping bail, then the bench warrant upon which his rendition from Kenya was grounded would, in hindsight, be seen to be wrong. It is a causal chain. Kanu was free on bond, the government invaded his home and to his credit, he successfully fled from the danger. But instead of giving him a hearing on why he fled, you declare him a fugitive and ultimately rendition him on account of that. That’s not acceptable. The government cannot profit from its own wrong.

“The rendition can’t stand because this entire thing was caused by the invasion and not by Kanu. But even if he jumped bail, extradition, not extraordinary rendition is the only legal pathway to forcing him back to Nigeria. But I can tell you that in the unique circumstances of Kanu, any extradition proceedings, either in Britain or Kenya, would have been summarily denied. That’s probably why Nigeria never bothered to apply for it. Better yet, extraordinary rendition may be a Pyrrhic victory but in the long run, it creates a helluva of legal, political and diplomatic problems for any persons or entities complicit in it.”

 

News

I Delivered $15m Agency Cash To Ex-NIMASA DG Akpobolokemi, EFCC Witness Tells Court

Published

on

By

A prosecution witness, Captain Ezekiel Bala-Agaba, testified in a Lagos Federal High Court on Thursday, that he personally delivered $15 million in cash to former NIMASA DG, Patrick Akpobolokemi.

The witness, Bala-Agaba, a former Executive Director of Maritime Safety, Shipping Development and Marine Operations at NIMASA, made the disclosure while testifying before Justice Ayokunle Faji of the Federal High Court in Lagos.

Captain Agaba, who appeared as the 15th prosecution witness, told the court that funds meant for pipeline surveillance were withdrawn from NIMASA’s accounts, converted into dollars, and handed over to Dr Akpobolokemi.

According to him, the money was taken to a Bureau de Change, which converted it into $15 million before the cash was delivered to the NIMASA office on Burma Road, Apapa, Lagos.

He said he subsequently took the money to the office of the then Director-General.

“The money was sent to a Bureau de Change, which later brought the dollar equivalent to our office at Burma Road, Apapa, Lagos. I asked my Personal Assistant, Ekene Nwakuche, to carry the bag and follow me to the Director-General’s office,” he told the court.

The witness explained that he collected the bag from his aide before entering the office.

“When we got to the door of the Director-General’s office, I collected the bag from him and asked him to wait outside. I then personally delivered the sum of $15 million to the Director-General.”

The witness was initially a defendant in the case but later opted to testify for the prosecution.

While being led in evidence by prosecuting counsel, Suleiman Suleiman, he explained the chain of command within NIMASA and how financial approvals were processed in the agency.

According to him, the Director-General is the overall head of the agency and issues instructions to directors, who then implement policies in line with the NIMASA Act.

He told the court that he chaired the agency’s Intelligence Committee, which was responsible for certain security-related operations.

“As chairman of the committee, I oversaw its activities and reported directly to the Director-General, Dr. Patrick Akpobolokemi,” he said.

During the proceedings, the witness was also shown a document containing a letter from Access Bank to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) detailing transactions in NIMASA’s accounts between 2013 and 2015.

When asked how much money he took to the former Director-General, Agaba replied: “$15 million.”

After listening to the testimony, Justice Faji adjourned the matter until April 22 and 23 for cross-examination of the witness.

The EFCC had in December 2015 arraigned Dr. Akpobolokemi and seven others before the court on a 30-count charge bordering on conspiracy, fraudulent conversion of funds and money laundering.

Those charged alongside the former NIMASA boss include, Warredi Enisuoh, Governor Juan, Ugo Frederick, Timi Alari, as well as Alkenzo Limited and Penniel Engineering Services Limited.

They pleaded not guilty to the offences.

The anti-graft agency alleged that the defendants conspired to divert funds running into over N1.15 billion under the guise of providing security intelligence in Nigeria’s maritime domain.

According to the EFCC, the NIMASA Intelligence Committee allegedly received N1,153,000,000 between December 2013 and July 2015.

Investigations further revealed that several companies contracted to execute the intelligence operations were either unregistered or lacked the capacity to perform the services, while some were allegedly linked to the defendants.

The prosecution also alleged that the defendants nominated or owned many of the companies used to execute the contracts.

One of the charges stated that the defendants conspired to commit offences punishable under the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2012.

 

Continue Reading

News

CBN Bars Chronic Loan Defaulters from Accessing New Banking Services

Published

on

By

The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has issued a directive to all financial institutions to immediately restrict certain banking services for large-ticket borrowers with non-performing loans (NPLs).

This move is aimed at strengthening credit discipline and protecting the stability of the Nigerian financial system following a rise in the industry’s NPL ratio to approximately 7%, exceeding the regulatory 5% threshold.

This order is specifically targeted at large-ticket obligors.

The CBN issued the directive in a circular to banks on Monday.

The latest instruction comes almost a week after the CBN asked financial institutions to stress test.

It is uncertain if the two directives are connected or what may have triggered the loan-related instruction, but the apex bank said it furthers its mandate to protect Nigeria’s financial system.

“In furtherance of its mandate to promote a sound financial system, protect depositors, and enhance prudential compliance within the banking sector, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) hereby directs all banks to restrict non-performing large ticket obligors, whose activities pose systemic risk to the financial system, from accessing specified banking services,” the circular reads in part.

“Any large-ticket obligor with a non-performing facility recorded in the CRMS and/or any licensed private credit bureau shall not be granted additional credit facilities. For the purpose of this restriction, credit facilities include loans and other forms of direct credit.

“In addition, such obligors shall not be granted banking facilities or contingent liabilities such as bankers’ confirmations, letters of credit, performance bonds, or advance payment guarantees.”

 

Continue Reading

News

Makinde Only In PDP Because He’s Not Seeking Re-election – Otitoju

Published

on

By

Babajide Kolade-Otitoju, the Director of News at TVC News, recently stated that Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde would likely have defected from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) if he was still serving his first term.

Otitoju stated this on Friday on TVC’s ‘Breakfast Show’.

He described the National Convention of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, in Ibadan last November as a mere waste of time.

“People must show good judgment at a critical phase. What was the point of having that convention? Two courts told you not to go ahead but you went ahead.

“I may not be a fan of former Senate President Bukola Saraki but if he says something that makes sense, I will be the first to admit it. He made sense when he said let’s go for caretaker. What’s the point of not listening to him?

“Later you will be shouting that the ruling party is behind your crisis, meanwhile you are the architect of your own misfortunes. You created this problem.

“If Makinde were in his first term, he would have fled like the dancing governor because his second term would have been in danger,” Otitoju said.

Continue Reading

Trending