Justice Abubakar Sadiq Umar of the FCT High
Court sitting in Maitama, Abuja, on Wednesday, February 17, 2016 refused to stop
further hearing on a suit filed by Economic and Financial Crimes Commission,
EFCC, against former Minister of Aviation, Babalola Borishade and four others
as prayed by the defendant’s counsel.
Borishade, his former personal assistant, Tunde
Dairo, and two others are alleged to have mismanaged a N5.2 billion Aviation
Safe Tower contract.
Others on trial for the alleged offence are
former Managing Director of Nigeria Airspace Management Agency, Rowland Iyayi;
an Australian, George Eider and Avsatel Communications Ltd.
The defendants had
been on trial since November 19, 2009 when they were arraigned by the EFCC on a
15-count charge of taking bribe and forging aviation contract documents.
The matter which was
slated for Wednesday, February 3, 2016 could not go on as planned as the Attorney
General of the Federation, AGF requested for a brief on the case by the EFCC
since the matter had been in court for about 7 years.
Consequent
upon AGF’s request, the EFCC had furnished his office with the brief of the
case and the proceedings that have transpired over time regarding the matter.
It would be recalled
that, counsel to the first defendant, Kehinde Ogunwumiju and Regina Okotie Eboh
representing the 4th and 5th defendants had earlier
prayed the court to strike out the case for lack of diligence on the part of the prosecution which was
strongly opposed by Chile Okoroma, counsel to EFCC.
Ruling on the application today, Justice Umar
opined that withdrawal from a case by a lawyer from a private firm does not
constitute abandonment or lack of appearance of the prosecution.
Consequently, he ruled that the application by
counsels to the defendants to foreclose or discharge the defendants is refused
and ordered the prosecution to continue its case.
Thereafter, Okoroma presented PW 10, Reuben
Omosigho, an operative with the Economic Governance Unit of the EFCC.
However, Ogunwumiju raised an objection saying
that, the evidence of the PW 10 was already on record and needed no
duplication, but cross-examination.
His objection was sustained by the court.
Rather than cross –examine the witness, Ogunwumiju
changed tactics and prayed the court for a short adjournment saying their
application to be furnished with the court’s records was still pending.
“We cannot afford to take chances with our own
records, we need to be guided by the court”, Ogunwumiju said.
Other counsels aligned with his submission.
Responding, Okoroma
vehemently opposed the application arguing that, “there is no law that states that the
cross-examination of a witness is dependent on the defence obtaining court
records”.
However, counsel to the 4th and 5th
defendants, R. Okotie Eboh argued that, “the adjournment being sought for is
not ill-conceived, but necessary for us to get our facts right”.
Justice Umar adjourned to the March 7, 2016 for
continuation of trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment