Within one week the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission and Department of Security Services lose four anti-corruption cases at different courts thereby raising concern about their competence to help government fight corruption in Nigeria

|  By Olu Ojewale  |  Apr 17, 2017 @ 01:00 GMT  |

IT was not a good week for federal government war on corruption. Within four days, from Monday, April 3 and Thursday, April 6, the three government anti-graft agencies lost four important and high profile cases.

Between Monday and Thursday, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, lost two cases, while the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, and the Department of State Security, DSS, lost one each.

First to be bruised was the EFCC on Monday when Justice Abdulaziz Anka of the federal high court in Lagos lifted the temporary forfeiture of N75 million placed on the account of Mike Ozekhome, SAN, a human rights lawyer.

The court had earlier granted an order for the forfeiture of the account for 120 days on the ground that the amount deposited in the said account on December 15, 2016, was suspected to be proceeds of crime.

The EFCC had alleged that Governor Ayo Fayose of Ekiti State, made a part-payment of N75million to the lawyer from an alleged N1.2billion the governor allegedly received from the Office of National Security Adviser, ONSA. The commission said it froze Ozekhome’s GTBank account because the N75million Fayose paid him was suspected to be proceeds of crime.

But ruling on Ozekhome’s application to defreeze the account, Anka held that Fayose paid the money from an unencumbered account. The judge said: “There is no argument whatsoever as to the source of the funds as rightly argued by the learned counsel for the EFCC, Rotimi Oyedepo, but the question is: can the respondent/applicant be liable for any infraction as of the time he received the amount in his account?

The judge said he arrived at his decision considering the fact that the source of the fund was derivable from an unencumbered account; that the account was unfrozen via the order of the federal high court in Ado Ekiti; that the amount has been dissipated; and that the funds were monies paid for the legal services rendered to Fayose.

“I find it very doubtful if the objection of the EFCC can be lawfully sustained,” the judge held.

Ozekhome is one of the lawyers of Fayose, who is having a legal battle with the EFCC.

Following closely, a day after, the ICPC similarly got its own bitter pills when Godsday Orubebe, a former minister of Niger Delta, was discharged and acquitted by an Abuja high court sitting at Apo over alleged complicity in N1.97 billion contract fraud.

Justice Olukayode Adeniyi, the trial judge, struck out the six-count charge the ICPC preferred against the former minister.

Orubebe was charged to the court by the ICPC in 2016 for N1.97 billion fraud, bothering on the diversion of funds meant for the compensation of owners of property on the Eket Urban section of the East-West road in Eket, Akwa Ibom State.

But Abubakar Malami, attorney-general of the federation in a letter to the chairman of the ICPC, said the case of misappropriation did not exist, and further prosecution could not be justified.

The anti-corruption agency withdrew its case against him and the former minister was, therefore, discharged and acquitted.

Barely 24 hours after Orubebe’s acquittal, Justice Adeniyi Ademola, Olabowale, his wife and Joe Agi, SAN, were discharged and acquitted by an FCT high court sitting in Maitama.

Ademola was arrested alongside a number of other judges for corruption and possession of firearms by the DSS in October last year.

He was charged to court on the allegation that he received $520,000 as gratification from some law firms between 2013 and 2016. The government called as many as 14 witnesses against the judge.

But in his ruling, Justice Jude Okeke, the trial judge, declared Ademola not guilty of all 18-count charge of corruption and illegal possession of firearm brought against him and his co-defendants.

The presiding judge held that the prosecution had failed to establish any prima facie case against the defendants.

He held that count one could not stand “being in violation of S36(a) of the Constitution which states that no one shall be charged or punished for an offence not covered by the law. It is hereby struck out.”

He, therefore, urged the security and law enforcement agencies to always conduct watertight investigation to give credence to the ongoing fight against corruption in the country.

On Thursday, April 6, the EFCC again lost another case when a federal high court sitting in Lagos, unfroze the account of Patience Jonathan, former first lady.

Justice Mojisola Olatoregun, presiding, unfroze the former first lady’s $5.8 million account in Skye Bank in line with the submission of Adedayo Adedipe, counsel to Mrs Jonathan, who had urged the court to unfreeze the account on the grounds that she was not a party in the suit leading to the order made by the court.

The anti-graft agency which initiated the suit leading to the order, did not file any response to the application filed to discharge the order.

In her ruling, Justice Olatoregun upheld the Adepipe’s submissions and consequently, discharged the order freezing the account.

With those judgments against the three anti-corruption agencies, Nigerians have expressed concern about the trend the corruption war of the President Muhammadu Buhari administration is taking. Some blamed it on lack of diligent investigations before going to court while others believe that the war was actually against some personalities in the country.

Yusuf Ali, SAN, blamed the development on the anti-corruption agencies’ lack of diligent investigation leading to the arrest or invitation of a suspect.

“Investigation is the nucleus of criminal trial. If you don’t have your investigation properly done it will be a disaster. It is time we begin to engage in proper investigation and not in dress rehearsal, media trial and playing to the gallery,” Yusuf said.

Kallah Bature, a businessman and public commentator, said despite the setback, government should be encouraged in its war against corruption. He said: “The very important fight against corruption must not be lost. The judiciary must live above board. It is the duty of the CJN to ensure that all corrupt judges are flushed out from the system before he is flushed out.”

But a commentator who simply identified himself as Eskay gave a profound food for thought with this: “I am very disappointed that Nigeria is deteriorating rather than getting better. I cannot tell a foreign national that cash gift to High Court Judges is allowed in my country. It is too ridiculous to understand how this case could be decided on that nearly illiterate basis. Does anyone ever tender money to a Judge with explicit words, like: “My lord, take this one million dollars. It is a bribe! Your Lordship should understand it as a bribe and accept it as such.”

“Bribe is instead given and understood by the giver in not so many words. The verdict issued by Judge Jude Okeke is a no-brainer for implicitly declaring themoney at issue as GIFT and ordering the accused person, Justice Adeniyi Ademola to take the money, retain it and spend it as he wishes. There’s nothing at all judicial in declaring cash delivery to a Judge’s spouse by a lawyer as a gift because in that abstruse definition there will never be a way to define bribe separately from a gift.

“The move by the federal government to appeal Judge Okeke’s nonsense diktat is the only way to save Nigeria from international ridicule.

“The anti-corruption body ought to know the strength of the cases they are taking to court on the basis of their investigations’’, he said.

Indeed, federal government has since appealed the judgement in favour of Ademola. But whether the appellate court will be able to convict the justice is a matter of conjecture.

|