el-Rufai has case to answer, EFCC tells court

THE Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), on Wednesday, told an Abuja High Court that the former Federal Capital Territory (FCT) minister, Nasir el-Rufai, has case to answer in court.
This is just as it asked the court to strike out the no-case applications brought by el-Rufai and two of his co-accused seeking to quash a case of abuse of office brought against them by the anti graft agency.
Others charged alongside el-Rufai were Altine Jibrin, former Director-General of the Abuja Geographic Information System (AGIS) and its former General Manager, Ismail Iro.
They were charged for illegal conversion of Plot 1201, a land meant for the building of a transmitting/injection sub-station for the PHCN in Asokoro.
They were also alleged to have conspired and converted Plot 3352 in Maitama, belonging to NIPOST, originally earmarked for the building of a district post office.
When the matter came up on Wednesday, counsel for EFCC, Adebayo Adelodun, prayed the court to discountenance the application of no case submission by the accused persons and urged it to order them to file their defence.
According to him, “running through the entirety of the written address as well as the adumbration, it is a misconception on the part of the defence to suggest we have to prove anything at this stage.
“This stage is whether a prima facie case has been made out and not to prove any ingredient of offences alleged.
“All that we are required to do at this stage is to link the accused persons with the charges, however tangible or remote.”
He urged  the court to note that the commission had placed before it all documentary and oral evidences which include the accused persons’ statements.
On the argument by the defence that prosecution did not produce the masterplan, Adelodun contented that prosecution needed not produce such because its existence was never in doubt and had been admitted by the statement of the first accused.
Earlier, counsel for the defence, Kanu Agabi and Akin Olujimi, had given various reasons while the charges must be quashed.
They said the prosecution had not proved any of the charges and that the evidence led were manifestly unreliable or discredited in cross–examination.
They further argued that the allegation that the plots in contention were originally allocated to PHCN and NIPOST in the Abuja Masterplan had been discredited by failure to produce the masterplan and that plots were neither enumerated nor allocated in the masterplan.
The trial judge, Justice Sadiq Abubakar, later reserved ruling on the application.
TRIBUNE