The Abia North chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has hailed the Court of Appeal which on Wednesday dismissed the no-case submission filed by a former Abia State governor, Orji Kalu, over the alleged N7.65bn fraud charges levelled against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).The party said the court had further vindicated it and other Nigerians who had been insisting that the former governor had a case to answer.
In a statement in Abuja by the Chairman of the PDP, Abia North, Matthew Ibe, the party demanded a speedy trial of the former governor.
“We support the ruling of the Appeal Court and we therefore renew our demand for the speedy trial of Chief Kalu as the only way to restore public confidence in the anti-corruption agenda of President Muhammadu Buhari,” he said.
The party claimed that Kalu had been carrying on as if he was a sacred cow.
This, it said, was the reason the case should be given an accelerated hearing to restore confidence in the judiciary.
Ibe added, “The former governor has been parading himself as President Muhammadu Buhari’s political ally and godson of the South-East.
“It was even strange to have allowed such a person with such a high-profile fraud allegation to have contested the last National Assembly election.
“We hail the ruling of the court and we demand a quick trial of the former governor because our state has yet to recover from the alleged widespread financial fraud that characterised his government.”
Justice M.L. Garba had in a lead judgment on Wednesday ruled that Justice Mohammed Idris, then of the Federal High Court in Lagos, was right to have on July 31, 2018 dismissed Kalu’s no-case submission and ordered him to put in his defence.
The appellate court also dismissed the appeals filed by Kalu’s co-defendants – Slok Nigeria Limited and Ude Udeogu – challenging the jurisdiction of Justice Idris to continue hearing the case after he was elevated from the Federal High Court to the Court of Appeal.
Justice Garba held that, contrary to the appellants’ contention, Section 396(7) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which empowers a high judge to continue to hear a part-heard criminal matter after being elevated to the Court of Appeal, did not offend the constitution.
The appellate court, therefore, ordered the defendants to return to the high court to put in their defence.
The prosecution had last year closed its case in the 12-year-old trial after calling 19 witnesses.
In a statement in Abuja by the Chairman of the PDP, Abia North, Matthew Ibe, the party demanded a speedy trial of the former governor.
“We support the ruling of the Appeal Court and we therefore renew our demand for the speedy trial of Chief Kalu as the only way to restore public confidence in the anti-corruption agenda of President Muhammadu Buhari,” he said.
The party claimed that Kalu had been carrying on as if he was a sacred cow.
This, it said, was the reason the case should be given an accelerated hearing to restore confidence in the judiciary.
Ibe added, “The former governor has been parading himself as President Muhammadu Buhari’s political ally and godson of the South-East.
“It was even strange to have allowed such a person with such a high-profile fraud allegation to have contested the last National Assembly election.
“We hail the ruling of the court and we demand a quick trial of the former governor because our state has yet to recover from the alleged widespread financial fraud that characterised his government.”
Justice M.L. Garba had in a lead judgment on Wednesday ruled that Justice Mohammed Idris, then of the Federal High Court in Lagos, was right to have on July 31, 2018 dismissed Kalu’s no-case submission and ordered him to put in his defence.
The appellate court also dismissed the appeals filed by Kalu’s co-defendants – Slok Nigeria Limited and Ude Udeogu – challenging the jurisdiction of Justice Idris to continue hearing the case after he was elevated from the Federal High Court to the Court of Appeal.
Justice Garba held that, contrary to the appellants’ contention, Section 396(7) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which empowers a high judge to continue to hear a part-heard criminal matter after being elevated to the Court of Appeal, did not offend the constitution.
The appellate court, therefore, ordered the defendants to return to the high court to put in their defence.
The prosecution had last year closed its case in the 12-year-old trial after calling 19 witnesses.
In this article: