News
Obaseki In Trouble As Court Orders APC To Open Fresh Suit Over Forgery
It seems Governor Obaseki has landed in another trouble as forgery case against him has taken a new twist.
There is a fresh report that the Abuja division of the Federal High Court on Wednesday ordered the All Progressive Congress (APC) to open its case against Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki in the alleged certificate forgery suit.
This was after the court refused to stay proceedings in the suit as requested by the Governor.
Justice Ahmed Mohammed in his ruling said the court will comply with the order of the Court of Appeal directing the court to continue with the trial on day to day basis.
The judge observed that his court will continue with the trial as directed by the Court of Appeal until the order is set aside.
Justice Mohammed noted that his court must obey the hierarchy of courts in line with the provisions of the law.
He held that given the order of the Court of Appeal and the nature of the case, the Christmas vacation is not enough ground to stay proceedings.
Accordingly, the court directed the plaintiff to open and close his case within two days beginning from Thursday, December 24 to Tuesday, December 29.
It equally gave the defendants two days to open and conclude their defence effective from Wednesday 30 to Thursday 31 of December 2020.
Earlier, counsel to the plaintiff, Chief Akin Olujimi, SAN, had informed the court about the ruling of the Court of Appeal on December 16, 2020, directing the trial court to proceed with the trial after dismissing the application for stay of execution brought by the governor, Godwin Obaseki.
He urged the court to proceed with the trial in compliance with the ruling of the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal.
But in opposition, counsel to the Governor Obaseki, Ken Mozia, SAN, urged the court not to proceed with the trial as his client has entered an appeal at the Supreme Court against the decision of the Court of Appeal, including an application to stay further proceedings on the matter.
He urged the court in the circumstances, to tarry a while and await the decision of the Supreme Court on the appeal.
‘My lord, the first defendant not satisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, has filed an appeal against the ruling and the consequential orders to the Supreme Court, which is the final court,’ he said.
‘The notice of appeal has been duly served on the parties in this case. Also, the record of appeal from the Court of Appeal has been duly transmitted to the Supreme Court, where it has been entered as appeal No: SC/C6/989/2020, and copies of the notice of appeal, the application for stay and other reliefs earlier mentioned are all exhibited in an affidavit deposed to by Abraham Olajide.
‘Also exhibited are the enrolled orders to appeals nos: CA/B/128/2020 and CA/B/128a/2020, the Court of Appeal Benin after delivering judgment directed the state High Court to continue with proceedings in suit No. FHC/B/CS/48/2020, between Kenneth Asekomeh and Another V All Progressive Congress (APC), and 3 others, where despite that order, the counsel to the defendant still filed an appeal at the Supreme Court and followed it up to the Federal High Court with an application for stay of proceedings and insisted that the Federal High Court await the determination of the appeal at the Supreme Court.
‘The Federal High Court acceded to that request, they cannot honestly ask this court to proceed having posited that the Federal High Court must wait, they have a duty to continue to maintain that position to say that the Federal High Court is obliged to await the determination of the appeal before the Supreme Court.’
He argued that once a party has taken steps to contest a decision of Court of Appeal by way of a further appeal to the Supreme Court and follows it up with an application for stay of proceedings, the judgment of the Court of Appeal will not be treated as final until the steps taken are completely resolved.
The second leg of his argument was predicated on the fact that the trial cannot be conducted during the Christmas vacation as contained in a circular issued by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court.
The said circular dated December 18, titled, “Notification of Federal High Court Christmas Vacation for 2020”, stipulated that only matters bordering on national interest, human rights-related issues and release of vessels shall be entertained during the vacation which begins on Tuesday, December 22 and ends on Friday, January 8, 2021.
The lawyer noted that by the said notification, the vacation Judge for the Abuja division of the Federal High Court is Justice Evelyn Maha.
‘Today, being within the period declared for Christmas vacation and this case not being one of the cases listed as those that can be entertained by vacation Judge, including the fact that your lordship is not a vacation judge, the court cannot exercise any jurisdiction on the matter.’
He argued that whether the matter is urgent or not is determinable by the facts contained in affidavit evidence led before the court adding that nothing short of that will suffice.
‘There is manifest non compliance in this case such that the court is not even in a position to contemplate whether this case is urgent or not by law.’
Mozia informed that the defence team has withheld their consent for any proceedings to be done during the Christmas vacation period.
The counsel to the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Isilalomhe Razak, aligned himself with the argument canvassed by counsel to Gov. Obaseki in urging the court to suspend proceedings and await the outcome of the appeal before the Supreme Court.
But responding, the counsel to the plaintiff, Olujimi, urged the court to discountenance the submissions of the defence team and proceed with the trial in compliance with the ruling and directive of the Court of Appeal.
While noting that the matter is time-bound, Olujimi argued that section 285 (a) of the 1999 Constitution (4th Alteration Act) is a compelling provision that proceedings at the trial court should not be stayed based on preliminary and interlocutory issues.
‘The compelling provisions of section 285 (a) is to the effect that where a preliminary or interlocutory issue is raised, the court shall suspend it’s ruling and deliver it at the stage of final judgment.
‘Secondly, the first and second defendants failed to appreciate that the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court has since July 24, 2020, settled the issue of hearing of all categories of pre-election matters in the Practice Direction number two issued by the Chief Judge.
‘What the Chief Judge issued in July was a Practice Direction which is legislation issued by him to regulate pre- election trials.’
He submitted that the said Practice Direction mandates a Judge to hear a pre-election matter pending before his court until judgment is delivered.
‘The Chief Judge did not say the practise direction applies only to annual vacation but includes all manner of vacation in general. A circular is not a rule of court. It is not legislation or law unlike the practice direction,’ Olujimi argued.
He argued further that paragraph two of the practice direction stated that nothing in the Federal High Court shall prevent the hearing of a pre-election matter to judgment.
He submitted that the position of the law, as settled by the Supreme Court is that where time is of the essence in a case before the court, there shall be no stay of proceedings pending appeal.
‘What the defendants are asking the court to do is to go against the directive of the Court of Appeal, which has not been set aside. I urged the court to decline such an invitation.’
The APC, in the suit marked FHC/B/CS/74/2020, prayed the court for an order disqualifying Gov. Obaseki from contesting the September 19 governorship election in Edo State on the grounds that he supplied false information on oath to INEC, an act said to be contrary to Section 31(5) and (6) of the Electoral Act, 2010.
The party accused the governor of forging his university certificate presented to INEC in aid of his qualification for the governorship election in Edo State.
The APC also claimed that there are discrepancies in the subject Obaseki claimed he passed in his West African Examinations Council (WAEC) exam.
The governor won the September 19 governorship election in Edo to secure a second term in office.
News
I Delivered $15m Agency Cash To Ex-NIMASA DG Akpobolokemi, EFCC Witness Tells Court
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.
News
CBN Bars Chronic Loan Defaulters from Accessing New Banking Services
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.”
News
Makinde Only In PDP Because He’s Not Seeking Re-election – Otitoju
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.
-
News2 days agoWorld War III Fears: Zelensky Reveals Warning To Trump
-
News1 day ago2027 Shakeup: 12 Lawmakers Defect To APC, ADC
-
News2 days agoTensions Rise As Makoko Communities Vow To Resist Relocation Order
-
News1 day agoTerror Surge: Tinubu Demands Results from Security Chiefs
-
News17 hours agoCorruption Probe: Court Grants ICPC Access To Data On El-Rufai’s Seized Gadgets
-
News21 hours agoBeyond My Wildest Dreams: Disu Opens Up During Handover From Egbetokun
-
News13 hours agoMakinde Only In PDP Because He’s Not Seeking Re-election – Otitoju
-
News12 hours agoCBN Bars Chronic Loan Defaulters from Accessing New Banking Services
