A Federal Excessive Courtroom decide in Abuja, Peter Lifu, on Monday, decried the gradual tempo of the N3.1 billion fraud trial of former Benue State governor, Gabriel Suswam.
Mr Lifu’s fear adopted the defence group’s request for a three-week adjournment.
“This case has been happening for 10 years. It doesn’t matter what, a case shouldn’t go on for 10 years,” mentioned Mr Lifu.
An announcement from the prosecution company, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), acknowledged that Monday’s proceedings had been meant for Mr Suswam and his co-defendant to open their defence.
However the listening to was lower quick by the defence’s request for adjournment for a lawyer of their group to get better from sickness and to afford the group sufficient time to arrange for defence.
Mr Suswam, who served as governor of Benue State from 2007 to 2015, was first arraigned by the EFCC in November 2015. He was charged alongside his then Commissioner for Finance, Omadachi Okolobia.
The prosecution accused them of diverting N3.1 billion, a part of the proceeds from the sale of Benue State’s shares held by the Benue Funding and Property Firm Restricted. The funds had been allegedly moved by Elixir Securities Restricted and Elixir Funding Companions Restricted. Whereas going through the costs, Mr Suswam has been elected to the Senate for one time period of 4 years.
The defendants had been re-arraigned in November 2020. The case was later reassigned to Mr Lifu after two different judges had dealt with it.
The prosecution proceeded to name 9 witnesses to show its case.
However as a substitute of opening their defence, the defendants opted to file a no-case submission calling for the dismissal of the costs on the grounds that the prosecution failed to determine a prima facie case in opposition to them.
However on 23 July, Mr Lifu dismissed the defendants’ no-case submission, ruling that the prosecution had led credible proof warranting their explanations. Ruling that the defendants had a case to reply, Mr Lifu ordered them to open their defence and adjourned until Monday.
Why trial stalled once more on Monday
At Monday’s proceedings, Mr Suswam’s lawyer, Joseph Daudu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), requested for a three-week adjournment on the grounds {that a} lawyer within the defence group, Chinelo Ogbozor, was hospitalised.
Mr Daudu additionally instructed the court docket that an attraction had been filed in opposition to the ruling on the no-case submission. He urged the court docket to adjourn until the dedication of the attraction. He additionally mentioned a three-week adjournment would give his group extra time to arrange for the defence.
Nevertheless, prosecuting counsel, Oluwaleke Atolagbe, opposed the request, arguing that the defence had greater than two months since after the ruling to arrange.
He additional pressured that the case has been on for 10 years and “they’ve had greater than 10 years to arrange.”
On the problem of pending attraction raised by the defence, Mr Atolagbe mentioned the trial court docket couldn’t watch for the Courtroom of Attraction, stressing that the Federal Excessive Courtroom “shouldn’t be certain to remain proceedings,” besides the place the appellate court docket gave a ruling.
The trial decide, in his remarks, lamented that the case had lingered for too lengthy. He mentioned it was troublesome to find the file and needed to ship workers to the attraction registry forward of the proceedings on Monday. He mentioned the file was discovered to be “scattered in every single place.”
He mentioned the state of affairs triggered his late arrival in court docket on Monday. “We can not go on like this, this case has been happening for 10 years,” he mentioned.
He adjourned the matter until 10 October for the defendants to open their defence.
READ ALSO: Alleged N3.1bn Fraud: Ex-Benue governor has case to reply, court docket guidelines
How the case moved between Judges
Over time, the case, which commenced in November 2015, has confronted a number of setbacks. It has handed by three judges. It journeyed backwards and forwards between the primary two to deal with the case – Ahmed Mohammed and Okon Abang. The Courtroom of Attraction’s ruling delivered in February 2020 ordered that the case be returned to Mr Mohammed, the primary decide to be assigned the matter. Each Messrs Abang and Mohammed have since been elevated to the Courtroom of Attraction bench.
After Mr Mohammed was elevated to the Courtroom of Attraction in 2023, the matter was reassigned to Mr Lifu.
In March 2024, the defendants had been re-arraigned earlier than Mr Lifu and, once more, pleaded not responsible.
