 |
| Ex Petroleum minister, Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke |
A Federal High Court in Lagos State has dismissed an application filed by Diezani Alison-Madueke, former Minister of Petroleum Resources, that she be joined as a defendant in an alleged N450m fraud case in Nigeria.
Justice Rilwan Aikawa, while rejecting the application, described it as bizarre and a misuse of court processes, stressing that he would not allow himself to be used to frustrate Diezani’s imminent trial in the United Kingdom, where she is currently under investigation by the Metropolitan Police, which had granted her bail.
The judge declined all of Diezani’s prayers, including an order to mandate the Attorney-General of the Federation to facilitate her return from the UK to Nigeria.
The judge held, “I will refrain from calling the application an abuse of court process but I will not hesitate to call it a misuse of court processes. I say this because my curiosity has been aroused; why will the applicant wait all this while before she came up with this bizarre application?”
The judge said he had taken cognizance of the averments in the counter-affidavit filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission that Diezani’s application was merely a ploy to escape justice in the UK, where her investigation by the Metropolitan Police had reached an advanced stage.
Justice Aikawa held, “These averments, as far as my records show, have not been controverted by the applicant. They are, therefore, deemed by law to have been admitted by the applicant in which case I have no option but to believe the averment.
“By this unchallenged averment, the action of the applicant, in my view, is simply a ploy to avoid justice in the UK. This court, unfortunately, cannot be used to promote just that.
“The discretion to prosecute or not to prosecute is entirely that of the Attorney General of the Federation. This court has no power to interfere with that discretion. It will therefore not attempt to do so. On the whole, therefore, I find this application to be lacking in merit and is accordingly dismissed.”
Diezani had, in the application, prayed the judge to allow her to be joined as a defendant in the case of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Dele Belgore; and a former Minister of National Planning, Prof. Abubakar Suleiman, who are being tried for alleged N450m fraud.
Her lawyer, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), argued that since Diezani’s name was mentioned in the charges, it would be unfair and a violation of her constitutional right to fair hearing to proceed without allowing her to be joined as defendant.
She prayed the court, among others, to make an order mandating the AGF to facilitate her appearance in court by bringing her to Nigeria from the UK.
But the application was opposed by both Belgore’s lawyer, Mr. Ebun Shofunde (SAN), and the counsel for the EFCC, Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo.
Shofunde contended that for Diezani to be joined as a defendant, the charge sheet would have to be amended, which meant that the trial, where witnesses had already been called and several documents tendered, would have to start all over again.
The SAN said such would be unfair to his client as his trial would be prolonged.
Oyedepo, while describing Diezani’s application as a violent abuse of court processes, said the law did not envisage that a charge sheet could be amended at the instance of a defendant or a third party.
He said the prosecution reserved the right to decide who it wished to prosecute and could not be forced to prosecute where it is not willing to do so.
Justice Aikawa upheld the arguments.
The judge held, “The applicant, while invoking section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, argued that her constitutionally guaranteed right to fair hearing will be denied if trial proceeds without her being joined as a named defendant; in my view, this is a case of crying wolf when there is none.
“The applicant is not part of the trial. Mohammed Dele Belgore and Abubakar Suleiman could complain of lack of fair hearing, if any, but not Diezani Alison-Madueke, the applicant, because she is not part of the trial.
“In any case, as rightly argued by the prosecuting counsel, assuming all is in order, this cannot be the right time to bring this application when witnesses have been called and a number of exhibits have been tendered. The prosecuting counsel has even given a hint that he will soon close his case.
“To roll the case back will definitely be tormenting to both the prosecution and the defence and it will run contrary to the new spirit of speedy dispensation of criminal matters. As it were, therefore, I have no option but to agree that the application is misconceived.”
Meanwhile, the judge admitted as exhibit, a trail of electronic mail exchanges between the Managing Director of Fidelity Bank, Mr. Nnamdi Okonkwo, and one Mr. Ogbonna.
An investigator with the EFCC, Usman Zakari, while being led in evidence by the prosecutor, Oyedepo, said through the email, Okonkwo passed some instructions given to him by Diezani to Ogbonna for implementation.
Zakari said his team found out that Diezani stashed $115.01m in Fidelity Bank with an instruction to Okonkwo to convert same to naira and distribute it to various beneficiaries in the 36 states of the federation, ahead of the 2015 general elections.
According to Zakari, Diezani’s email to Okonkwo had an attachment containing a list of those to benefit from the money which was converted to N23bn and the amount to be given to each person.
He pointed out to the judge from the list, which was already admitted as exhibit by the court, that Belgore’s name was listed as number 61 while Suleiman was listed as number 63 on the list of beneficiaries.
The investigator told the court that the SAN and the don were instructed to be paid N450m and that they collected same and signed for it at the Ilorin Road Branch of Fidelity Bank in Kwara State.
Zakari said after collecting the N450m in cash, Belgore and Suleiman subsequently distributed the money in cash to various beneficiaries.
For instance he said one Sheriff Shagaya was paid N50m cash by Belgore on March 27, 2015, stressing that the payment of N50m cash and others amounted to a violation of the money laundering law.
“Hajia Bola Shagaya did not sign Exhibit A. There was a payment of N50m to one Sherif Shagaya by the first defendant in cash without going through any financial institution,” Zakari said.
Further proceedings in the case have been adjourned till November 13 and 14, 2017.
Justice Rilwan Aikawa, while rejecting the application, described it as bizarre and a misuse of court processes, stressing that he would not allow himself to be used to frustrate Diezani’s imminent trial in the United Kingdom, where she is currently under investigation by the Metropolitan Police, which had granted her bail.
The judge declined all of Diezani’s prayers, including an order to mandate the Attorney-General of the Federation to facilitate her return from the UK to Nigeria.
The judge held, “I will refrain from calling the application an abuse of court process but I will not hesitate to call it a misuse of court processes. I say this because my curiosity has been aroused; why will the applicant wait all this while before she came up with this bizarre application?”
The judge said he had taken cognizance of the averments in the counter-affidavit filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission that Diezani’s application was merely a ploy to escape justice in the UK, where her investigation by the Metropolitan Police had reached an advanced stage.
Justice Aikawa held, “These averments, as far as my records show, have not been controverted by the applicant. They are, therefore, deemed by law to have been admitted by the applicant in which case I have no option but to believe the averment.
“By this unchallenged averment, the action of the applicant, in my view, is simply a ploy to avoid justice in the UK. This court, unfortunately, cannot be used to promote just that.
“The discretion to prosecute or not to prosecute is entirely that of the Attorney General of the Federation. This court has no power to interfere with that discretion. It will therefore not attempt to do so. On the whole, therefore, I find this application to be lacking in merit and is accordingly dismissed.”
Diezani had, in the application, prayed the judge to allow her to be joined as a defendant in the case of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Dele Belgore; and a former Minister of National Planning, Prof. Abubakar Suleiman, who are being tried for alleged N450m fraud.
Her lawyer, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), argued that since Diezani’s name was mentioned in the charges, it would be unfair and a violation of her constitutional right to fair hearing to proceed without allowing her to be joined as defendant.
She prayed the court, among others, to make an order mandating the AGF to facilitate her appearance in court by bringing her to Nigeria from the UK.
But the application was opposed by both Belgore’s lawyer, Mr. Ebun Shofunde (SAN), and the counsel for the EFCC, Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo.
Shofunde contended that for Diezani to be joined as a defendant, the charge sheet would have to be amended, which meant that the trial, where witnesses had already been called and several documents tendered, would have to start all over again.
The SAN said such would be unfair to his client as his trial would be prolonged.
Oyedepo, while describing Diezani’s application as a violent abuse of court processes, said the law did not envisage that a charge sheet could be amended at the instance of a defendant or a third party.
He said the prosecution reserved the right to decide who it wished to prosecute and could not be forced to prosecute where it is not willing to do so.
Justice Aikawa upheld the arguments.
The judge held, “The applicant, while invoking section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, argued that her constitutionally guaranteed right to fair hearing will be denied if trial proceeds without her being joined as a named defendant; in my view, this is a case of crying wolf when there is none.
“The applicant is not part of the trial. Mohammed Dele Belgore and Abubakar Suleiman could complain of lack of fair hearing, if any, but not Diezani Alison-Madueke, the applicant, because she is not part of the trial.
“In any case, as rightly argued by the prosecuting counsel, assuming all is in order, this cannot be the right time to bring this application when witnesses have been called and a number of exhibits have been tendered. The prosecuting counsel has even given a hint that he will soon close his case.
“To roll the case back will definitely be tormenting to both the prosecution and the defence and it will run contrary to the new spirit of speedy dispensation of criminal matters. As it were, therefore, I have no option but to agree that the application is misconceived.”
Meanwhile, the judge admitted as exhibit, a trail of electronic mail exchanges between the Managing Director of Fidelity Bank, Mr. Nnamdi Okonkwo, and one Mr. Ogbonna.
An investigator with the EFCC, Usman Zakari, while being led in evidence by the prosecutor, Oyedepo, said through the email, Okonkwo passed some instructions given to him by Diezani to Ogbonna for implementation.
Zakari said his team found out that Diezani stashed $115.01m in Fidelity Bank with an instruction to Okonkwo to convert same to naira and distribute it to various beneficiaries in the 36 states of the federation, ahead of the 2015 general elections.
According to Zakari, Diezani’s email to Okonkwo had an attachment containing a list of those to benefit from the money which was converted to N23bn and the amount to be given to each person.
He pointed out to the judge from the list, which was already admitted as exhibit by the court, that Belgore’s name was listed as number 61 while Suleiman was listed as number 63 on the list of beneficiaries.
The investigator told the court that the SAN and the don were instructed to be paid N450m and that they collected same and signed for it at the Ilorin Road Branch of Fidelity Bank in Kwara State.
Zakari said after collecting the N450m in cash, Belgore and Suleiman subsequently distributed the money in cash to various beneficiaries.
For instance he said one Sheriff Shagaya was paid N50m cash by Belgore on March 27, 2015, stressing that the payment of N50m cash and others amounted to a violation of the money laundering law.
“Hajia Bola Shagaya did not sign Exhibit A. There was a payment of N50m to one Sherif Shagaya by the first defendant in cash without going through any financial institution,” Zakari said.
Further proceedings in the case have been adjourned till November 13 and 14, 2017.
In this article: