Ololade Adeyanju/
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has preferred a 30 count charge against a Federal High Court Judge, Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia and Godwin Obla (SAN), who was a prosecutor of the anti-graft agency.
According to the charge, number LD/367/C/16, which was made available to Newsmakers, Hon. Justice Rita Ngozi Ofili-Ajumogobia was listed as first defendant, while Godwin Obla (SAN) was named as second defendant.
The defendants were said to have committed the offence on May 21, 2015, by conspiring to pervert the course of justice with the sum of N5million.
The said sum of money was alleged to have been transferred to one Nigel & Colive Ltd, in relation to a charge number FHC/L/C/482/10.
Ajumogobia was named as the sole signatory to Nigel & Colive Ltd.
Both defendants were said to have acted in contravention of the provisions of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State, 2011.
In counts one to four, Obla allegedly offered gratification in the said sum by transferring the money from his company’s account Obla & Co., domiciled with the United Bank for Africa, to Nigel & Colive.
The said transfer was allegedly made to restrain a public officer from acting in exercise of her official duties.
In count five, Ajumogobia was said to have unlawfully enriched herself by receiving a transfer or the sum of N18 million from one Arkleem Oil and Gas Ltd, sent to her Diamond Bank account.
In counts six to 20, the judge was alleged to have also received a transfer of monies from various outlets to her Diamond Bank account to the tune of over 788,000 dollars.
In count 29, the judge was alleged to have forged a deed of assignment between a company, County City Bricks Dev. Co. Ltd and Nigel & Colive Ltd.
In count 30, the judge was also alleged to have made a false statement to the EFCC that she was on admission at one Gold Cross hospital located at Bourdillon, Ikoyi.
All offences are said to be contrary to the provisions of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State 2011 as well as the EFCC (establishment) Act, 2004.
Newsmakers learned that the charges are pending before a Lagos High Court, while no date has been fixed for their arraignment.
Meanwhile, Obla has asked a Federal High Court in Lagos to declare his continued detention by the commission as unlawful.
This is just as Justice Muslim Hassan of the Federal High Court in Ikoyi, Lagos, yesterday, rejected an ex-parte motion filed by Ofili-Ajumogobia seeking her release from the custody of the EFCC.
Obla through his counsel, Mr Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), brought an application praying the court to declare his continued detention unlawful.
Arguing his application at the mention of the case, Adedipe informed the court that he had a written address in support of his application and a further and better affidavit, as well as an affidavit of urgency all filed on November 14.
Adedipe urged the court to hold that the continued detention of Obla, as well as the seizure of his mobile phones, constituted an infringement on his rights to liberty and ownership of property.
He told the court that the applicant was invited to the commission’s office on November 8, where he was unduly detained till date.
According to him, the phones of the applicant were also seized, contrary to constitutional provisions to own property.
He further submitted that the detention of Obla from November 8, till when the EFCC obtained a magisterial order for further detention, was a gross violation of his rights to personal liberty.
He urged the court to so hold.
In response, counsel to the EFCC, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, urged the court to dismiss the applicant’s processes for lack of merit.
He argued that the steps taken by the EFCC were allowed by law in the dispensation of its duties.
According to him, intelligence report showed that the applicant had a company known as Obla & Co Ltd, from which the sum of N5million was transferred to Hon. Justice Ajumogobia via a company known as Nigel & Colive Ltd.
He said that, also following intelligence reports, Ajumogobia was discovered to be the sole signatory to Nigel & Colive Ltd, and that the said sum of money was transferred to the judge, during the pendency of a case before her court with suit numbered FHC/L/CS/482/10.
He argued that the mere transfer of the said sum to the judge during the pendency of a case before her clearly showed a mind set to unduly gratify.
He urged the court to hold that there existed a reasonable cause for suspicion by the commission.
“The applicant even agreed that there was a communication between him and the judge” he further submitted.
On the issue of undue detention, Oyedepo told the court that EFCC could not conclude its investigations on November 8, after detaining the applicant. So, on November 9, an application was brought before a Magistrate court for a remand order.
He said that the court, which was empowered by the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Laws, granted a remand order for 14 days, adding that this was done in the presence of the applicant.
He argued that the applicant did not file any application before the magistrate court for a variation of terms, or even an appeal against its ruling.
He added that Federal High Court could, therefore, not sit on appeal over the issue.
On the argument of unlawful detention, Oyedepo submitted that even the constitution allows for the liberty of individuals to be curtailed, adding that the EFCC acted in line with due provisions of the law.
On the seizure of the applicant’s mobile phones, Oyedepo argued that section 44 (k) of the constitution allows for the temporary take-over of property for purposes of enquiry, adding that such right was qualified.
He, therefore, urged the court not to allow it to be used as a shield against lawful prosecution.
After listening to the submissions of both counsels, Justice Mohammed Idris fixed November 25 for judgement.
Moyosore Onigbanjo, who appeared for the judge, argued the motion seeking immediate release of Ofili-Ajumogobia.
The defence counsel said the detention of the judge in EFCC custody for more than 24 hours violated her fundamental rights.
He urged the court to order the EFCC to either charge his client to court or release her, noting that Ofili-Ajumogobia is ready to defend herself if or when charged to court.
Justice Hassan, however, declined the application and ordered him to serve EFCC the motion on notice.
The judge further stated that the prayers being sought by Mrs. Ofili-Ajumogobia could not be heard by motion ex parte, and adjourned the hearing to November 28.
0