Former Chief of Defence Staff Alex Badeh. Photo Ladidi Lucy Elukpo.
• Former CDS objects to search on property
• NIMASA ex-boss has case to answer, says court
The defence in the trial of former Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Alex Badeh yesterday at the Federal High Court vehemently objected to the admissibility of a search warrant on a property at Ogun River Street, Maitama, Abuja, allegedly belonging to the defendant.
Badeh is standing trial alongside Iyalikam Nigeria Limited on a 10-count charge of money laundering, criminal breach of trust and corruption to the tune of N3.97 billion.
Counsel to the first defendant, Sanusi Lasun (SAN), maintained his objection on the ground that the warrant was ‘purportedly obtained’ in clear contravention of section 150 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 which addresses the issue of the presence of the owner of a property or an appointed party.
Lasun argued that there is no provision in the law permitting a person conducting search to pick people on the street to witness a search. He maintained that it must be the person whose premises is being searched or somebody nominated by the accused owner to be a witness in the search.
The witness, Mohammed Dodi, a Senior Detective Superintendent (SDS) with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and investigating officer in the case against the defendant, said while giving his testimony, that his team executed search warrants on two of the defendant’s properties in Abuja and recovered $1 million in one of them.
He said his team found 16 bundles of 50,000 dollars and two sealed bundles of 100,000 dollars, which amounted to one million US Dollars. Also found was a red box, which he said he could not remember what was written on it.
The witness explained that two teams were designated as Special Task Force (STF) 1a and 1b, with a mandate to investigate cases involving corruption from the Office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) and any other case reported from the office of the NSA.
In respect to the defendant, the witness said Badeh’s case was headed by team B and not his team A. He said he was instructed by team B leader, Abubakar Madaki, to go and conduct a search in the house of the first defendant located in Asokoro in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.
Earlier, he told the court that sometime in November 2015, the Acting Executive Chairman of the Commission constituted a team headed by Chief Superintendent, Isyku Sharu, Abubakar Madaki and some others. The team was divided into two. Team A was headed by Sharu and the other by Madaki.
The witness, under examination by Prosecution Counsel, Rotimi Jacob (SAN), had said while a search on the first property at Asokoro was conducted in the presence of Badeh and his assistant where bank documents and landed property documents were recovered, he admitted to defense counsel Lasun that although the second property at Ogun River Street was conducted with a search warrant, the warrant was executed in the absence of the defendant.
The witness, however, said when they got to the building and found there was nobody living there, they had to call the security man from the neighboring building to witness to the search.
“The front door and the back door were locked. We had to climb up to the balcony and entered into the living area of the upper floor, came down through the stair case to the living area of the ground floor and started the search.
It was stocked with brand new furniture and wrapped still new. Some of the furniture, we observed, bore the name of the first defendant. We searched through the entire building and some of the rooms were empty,” he said.
The witness further testified that during the search in the biggest room upstairs, in a very large wardrobe was a bag found by a pack for a kettle in the upper compartment.
“When we removed the pack, we saw a bag and opened it. We found that the money in it was US Dollars. We counted the money and it was 16 bundles of 50,000 dollars and two sealed bundles of 100,000 dollars, which amounted to one million dollars,” the witness further said.
He said they had earlier counted the bundle by bundle, but thereafter counted note by note and it amounted to exactly one million dollars. He added that a carpenter they took along helped access rooms that they could not open.
The prosecution counsel presented two search warrants and the red box recovered from the said property before the court.
Counsel to the first defendant along with the first defendant upon examination of the items presented, asked for an adjournment for thorough perusal of the documents as they were not previously frontloaded before the court.
Rotimi, in his objection, said enough notification had been given to the defense in list of items presented to the court in February 2016. Besides, he was still not done with examining the witness.
The judge stood down the matter for 40 minutes for the parties to deliberate the admissibility of the said documents.
Upon resumption from the short break, the defense counsel said he would not object to the admissibility of the search warrant for the Asokoro property but he objected to admissibility of search warrant for the Maitama property.
“It is in violation of section 150 of ACJA and anything in violation of ACJA which regulates administration of criminal matters in the country is a nullity,” he said.
The counsel therefore, urged the court to reject the admissibility of the other items except for the search warrant for the Asokoro property.
Counsel to the second defendant aligned himself with the submission of the 1st defendant saying the court should not consider as relevant what is deemed illegal in law. On the ground of relevance, he urged the court to reject the document and item.
Rotimi Williams, in his response, however, said the submission of the defense that the document is illegal was incorrect.
He cited sections 149 and 150. He argued that by provisions of section 149 (4), a search warrant is meant to be executed in the presence of two witnesses and the person to whom the warrant is addressed. The provision allows the person to whom the warrant is directed to look for a witness in the neighborhood.
He said that the defendant alleged that it was not his house and he was not an occupant, so, how can the section 150 apply, ‘assuming that the search is illegal, the source of how the documents were obtained are irrelevant for the purpose of admissibility. (See Musa Sadau and the State NWLR, 1968 p. 125.)
“The source of evidence is not relevant to admissibility but how relevant such evidence is to the proceedings.”
The matter was adjourned almost abruptly at the instance of the judge who said he had an urgent administrative matter to attend to in his chambers. He therefore adjourned arguments to continue today.
In a related development, Justice Mojisola Olatoregun of the Federal High Court, Lagos, yesterday ordered a former Acting Director General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Calistus Obi, to enter his defence to a N136 million fraud charge leveled against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The anti-graft agency had preferred an eight count charge against Obi who was also an Executive Director of NIMASA before he was elevated to Acting DG briefly after the removal of Patrick Akpobolokemi. He was charged alongside one Alu Dismas, a former personal assistant to Akpobolokemi.
They had however, pleaded not guilty to the charges and were admitted to bail in the sum of N5 million each.
The trial judge on Tuesday ordered the accused to enter their defence to the charges against them, while delivering her ruling on a no case submission filed by the accused.
The court consequently adjourned the suit to March 24 and 27 for the accused to open their defence, adding that the defence must be prepared to open and close its case on those dates, in order to make progress.
Meanwhile, the same judge has began trial-within-trial to test the voluntariness of statements obtained from another former acting Director General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency
(NIMASA), Haruna Jauro.
Jauro, who assumed leadership of NIMASA soon after Calistus Obi was removed as Acting DG, is being charged by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) with a N304.1 million fraud.
He is standing trial alongside Dauda Bawa and Thlumbau Enterprises Ltd on 19 counts bordering on the offences.
They were arraigned on April 12, 2016 and had pleaded not guilty to the charges. The court had admitted them to bail in the sum of N5 million with two sureties each in like sum.
Trial had already started with the prosecutor, Rotimi Oyedepo calling his first witness, Mr. Orji Chukwuma, who testified how several sums of monies were converted by the accused.
When Oyedepo sought to tender the written statement of the accused as evidence in court, counsel to the accused, Olalekan Ojo objected, arguing that the said statements were not voluntarily obtained.
The trial judge, Justice Mojisola Olatoregun, as a result, adjourned the case to conduct trial-within-trial. He also informed the court that he holds a certificate in Cinemat ography. The hearing continues March 3, 2017.
Facebook: Ajiboye De Newmaster
Twitter : @De_newmaster
WhatsApp: +2348100144062
Instagram: @ajiboyedenewmaster
0 comments:
Post a Comment