 |
| Federal High Court in Lagos |
The Federal High Court in Lagos has adjourned till January 28, 2019 to hear an application by a former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Jumoke Akinjide, praying for the release of her passport.
Akinjide’s lawyer, Chief Bolaji Ayorinde (SAN), told the court on Monday that his client, who is being tried for allegedly laundering N650m, needed the passport to enable her to travel outside the country.
Ayorinde told Justice Muslim Hassan that the application was ripe for hearing, noting that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, which is prosecuting Akinjide, did not file any court process in opposition.
He described the application as innocuous, noting that Akinjide planned to travel outside the country on March 7, 2019 and return on March 23, 2019.
But the prosecuting counsel for the EFCC, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, urged the court not to hear the application yet as the ex-minister’s co-defendants had filed separate applications to challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
Oyedepo disagreed with Ayorinde that the applications by the two other defendants had nothing do with Akinjide’s application.
The EFCC lawyer said, “In a joint trial, two parties are saying the court lacks jurisdiction, another party is seeking the court’s discretion. It is technically incorrect to say that the applications are not interwoven.”
Intervening, Justice Hassan said although he did not think that the applications were interwoven, it would be more convenient for him to take the three applications together and deliver a joint ruling.
The EFCC is prosecuting Akinjide alongside Senator Ayo Adeseun and a leader of the Peoples Democratic Party in Oyo State, Mrs Olanrewaju Otiti.
Earlier during the Monday’s proceedings, Adeseun’s lawyer, Mr Michael Lana, called the court’s attention to his client’s pending application challenging the court’s jurisdiction, which, he said, was ripe for hearing.
Similarly, Otiti’s lawyer, Mr Akinola Oladeji, told the court that his client had a similar application filed since December last year.
He was however unhappy that the application might not be heard because the EFCC only served him with a counter-affidavit in court on Monday morning which he needed to respond to.
Oyedepo, while apologising for the mix-up that led to the delay in serving Oladeji with the EFCC’s counter-affidavit, said it was best to wait for Oladeji to respond before taking the application by Lana since the two applications bordered on the same thing.
Although Ayorinde urged the court to quickly deal with Akinjide’s travel application and get it out of the way, Oyedepo argued that the applications challenging jurisdiction should be determined first.
Akinjide, Adeseun and Otiti were on January 16, 2018 arraigned on 24 counts of money laundering.
The EFCC, in the charges, accused them of collecting N650m from a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke, in the build-up to the 2015 general elections.
The anti-graft agency claimed that they ought to have “reasonably known that the money formed part of proceeds of an unlawful act,” adding that they handled it without going through a financial institution in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act.
It said they acted contrary to Section 18(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2012, were liable to punishment under Section 15(3) and 4 of the same Act.
But the defendants pleaded not guilty.
Akinjide’s lawyer, Chief Bolaji Ayorinde (SAN), told the court on Monday that his client, who is being tried for allegedly laundering N650m, needed the passport to enable her to travel outside the country.
Ayorinde told Justice Muslim Hassan that the application was ripe for hearing, noting that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, which is prosecuting Akinjide, did not file any court process in opposition.
He described the application as innocuous, noting that Akinjide planned to travel outside the country on March 7, 2019 and return on March 23, 2019.
But the prosecuting counsel for the EFCC, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, urged the court not to hear the application yet as the ex-minister’s co-defendants had filed separate applications to challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
Oyedepo disagreed with Ayorinde that the applications by the two other defendants had nothing do with Akinjide’s application.
The EFCC lawyer said, “In a joint trial, two parties are saying the court lacks jurisdiction, another party is seeking the court’s discretion. It is technically incorrect to say that the applications are not interwoven.”
Intervening, Justice Hassan said although he did not think that the applications were interwoven, it would be more convenient for him to take the three applications together and deliver a joint ruling.
The EFCC is prosecuting Akinjide alongside Senator Ayo Adeseun and a leader of the Peoples Democratic Party in Oyo State, Mrs Olanrewaju Otiti.
Earlier during the Monday’s proceedings, Adeseun’s lawyer, Mr Michael Lana, called the court’s attention to his client’s pending application challenging the court’s jurisdiction, which, he said, was ripe for hearing.
Similarly, Otiti’s lawyer, Mr Akinola Oladeji, told the court that his client had a similar application filed since December last year.
He was however unhappy that the application might not be heard because the EFCC only served him with a counter-affidavit in court on Monday morning which he needed to respond to.
Oyedepo, while apologising for the mix-up that led to the delay in serving Oladeji with the EFCC’s counter-affidavit, said it was best to wait for Oladeji to respond before taking the application by Lana since the two applications bordered on the same thing.
Although Ayorinde urged the court to quickly deal with Akinjide’s travel application and get it out of the way, Oyedepo argued that the applications challenging jurisdiction should be determined first.
Akinjide, Adeseun and Otiti were on January 16, 2018 arraigned on 24 counts of money laundering.
The EFCC, in the charges, accused them of collecting N650m from a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke, in the build-up to the 2015 general elections.
The anti-graft agency claimed that they ought to have “reasonably known that the money formed part of proceeds of an unlawful act,” adding that they handled it without going through a financial institution in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act.
It said they acted contrary to Section 18(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2012, were liable to punishment under Section 15(3) and 4 of the same Act.
But the defendants pleaded not guilty.
In this article: