Exclusive: Again, Billionaire Kidnapper’s Lawyer Loses Court Case …To Pay N500K Fine

Ladipo Sanusi/

In what appears to have become a recurring decimal, the lawyer standing for billionaire kidnapper, Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike, aka Evans, has lost yet another case in court.

Olukoya Ogungbeje lost out yesterday, when Justice Ibrahim Buba at a Federal High Court, in Lagos, dismissed two fundamental rights applications filed by him.

Ogungbeje had lost many of such cases in his career.

He had filed the case on behalf of his clients, Messrs Chief Kenneth Chukwuemeka Ajoku and Chidinma Ozurumba, against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), but it was dismissed for lack of merit and for being frivolous.

The judge also awarded a total cost of N500, 000 against the two petitioners.

Last week, Ogungbeje filed such fundamental rights suit against police authorities in a bid to set Evans free, claiming that the police illegally detained the suspect who had made a series of televised confessions on how he had kidnapped his victims and kept them for as long as seven months until their families coughed out as much as $1million.

A victim’s son had revealed that his 86-year-old father was killed by Evans and his gang after he had paid a huge ransom.

Other respondents in Ajoku’s suit are a Lagos based-lawyer, Mr. Taiwo Kupolati, Folorunsho Sholanke, Jide Olaleye, Hon. Abraham Ogunleye, Kolade Akinwunmi and Dr. Ishaku Danladi Msheliza.

The two petitioners in suits marked FHC/L/CS/736/2017, and FHC/L/CS 803/2017, had urged the court to declare that the arrest and detention by the Operatives and agent of EFCC on May 4, 2017, at the instigation of other respondents for taking up the brief of his client and without cause is illegal, wrongful, unlawful, and unconstitutional as it violates the applicant’s fundamental rights as guaranteed under sections 33, 34, 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The applicants have also urged the court to declare that the forceful invasion of the applicants’ office situated at 23 Road, O Close, Block 2, Flat 2, Festac Town, Lagos, by operatives of EFCC at the instigation of other respondents without cause or any order of the court, is illegal, wrongful, unlawful and unconstitutional as it violates the applicant’s fundamental rights as guaranteed under sections 33, 34, 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

They have also urged the court to declare that forceful sealing, padlocking of their office, and forceful seizure, confiscation and carting away of vital landed property documents and court processes from the office by armed operatives of the EFCC at the instigation of other respondents is illegal, wrongful, unlawful and unconstitutional, as it violates the applicants’ fundamental rights as guaranteed under section 36, 43 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution of Federal the Republic of Nigeria.

The first applicant, Chief Ajoku, had asked the Court for an order compelling the respondents severally and jointly to pay the sum of N300 million, while the second applicant, Mrs. Ozurumba, asked for N100 million as general and exemplary damages for threat to life and rights, arrest, detention, harassment, inconvenience, forceful invasion, and siege on their office with cause or any order of the Court.

They have also asked the Court for an order restraining the respondents, their agents, servants, privies, or anybody deriving authority from them by whatever name called, from further harassing, intimidating, arresting, detaining, inviting, Investigating, charging, seizing or taking untoward action against them on any fact connected with or related to the facts of the case.

Responding to the suits, the EFCC in two separate counter-affidavits deposed to by Ayodele Samuel and Makinde Adebayo, and argued before the Court by Mr. Banjo James, urged the Judge to refuse the applicants’ applications for being frivolous and lacking in merit.

The deponents averred that they are members of Land and Property Fraud Section Team A, of the EFCC, assigned to carry out investigation into an alleged case of forgery involving the first applicant, Chief Ajoku, vide a petition dated May 2, 2017, wherein it was alleged that Chief Ajoku was in possession of forged Power of Attorney, and he was using same to carry out criminal activities.

The deponents averred that in furtherance of the investigation, their agency never stormed the office of the applicants with 28 heavily armed operatives in a commando style, and that their office was never ransacked.

The deponents also stated that the EFCC did not, and never, cart away any documents whatsoever, nor did it seize or confiscate any document. They added that the operatives of the EFCC did not arrest, harass, embarrass, invade or handcuff the applicants, as they were not in the office on that day.

The deponents stated that the second applicant, Mrs Ozurumba, who was arrested by the EFCC, was granted bail after completion of her statement, and released to her husband, as she was never detained, harassed or intimidated.

They claimed that the applicants’ argument is aimed at deceiving the Court and stalk Investigation of the petition against them, as they were never threatened.

They urged the Court not to grant the applications.

Delivering judgement on the two applications on Friday, Justice Ibrahim Nasir Buba, while dismissing the two applications for lacking in merit, and being frivolous, awarded a total cost of N500, 000, against the two applicants in favour of the EFCC and other respondents.

Last April, Ogungbeje filed a suit asking the Federal High Court to stay proceedings on the forfeiture of $43,449,947 (about N15billion), N23, 218, 000 and £27,800 (about N10.6 million) found in a flat in Ikoyi, Lagos.

He also sought an order directing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to furnish the court with a report of its preliminary or final investigation on the source of the money, its owner, and how the currencies got into the building.

Ogungbeje, in a motion on notice asked the court not to order a permanent forfeiture of the money since there are claims and counter claims regarding its ownership by the Rivers State government and the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) and since the Federal Government had set up the Osinbajo panel to find the truth about the ownership of the money.

The case did not get anywhere as the money was later permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja also declined an application filed by Ogungbeje, seeking an order to stop the arrest or any ‘untoward action’ against eight judges whose houses were raided by operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).

Those he wanted to restrain by the order included President Muhammadu Buhari, the DSS, the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Police.

He had on October 14, 2016 filed the substantive suit seeking 10 prayers, among which is an order awarding N50 billion against the defendants as “general and exemplary damages”.

He argued that the arrest of the judges without recourse to the NJC was unlawful and amounted to humiliating them.

Justice Gabriel Kolawole in a bench ruling delivered after Ogungbeje’s counsel, Ayo Ogundele, moved the ex parte application, held that he needed to resolve a number of issues including the locus standi of the plaintiff in an inter-party hearing before he could make a pronouncement on the prayer.

Ogungbeje also filed a suit in Lagos in 2014 asking for the reinstatement of Murtala Nyako as governor of Adamawa State. This was after Nyako was impeached by the state assembly in July of the same year and the speaker of the state assembly had taken over.

Again, the case hit the rocks.

Ogungbeje claimed the Assembly’s alleged failure to serve Nyako personally with the impeachment notice violated his fundamental right to fair hearing as enshrined under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

Newsmakersng learnt that he sued the Lagos State Government on behalf of Prophet T.B. Joshua over the collapse of the Synagogue church building without the knowledge of the clergy man, who had to settle with him to withdraw the case.

0