New Telegraph

You have case to answer, court tells lawyer accused of N4m bribe by EFCC

Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo of a Lagos High Court in Ikeja has dismissed the ‘no case’ submission of a lawyer, Taiwo Oreagba, charged with alleged corrupt demand and obtaining of N4 million from one, Henry Umoh, under false pretence by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

 

The judge while dismissing Oreagba’s ‘no case’ submission held that the evidence before the court raised several questions that needed clarifications from her. It would be recalled that Oreagba was on November 12, 2020, arraigned a two-count charge bordering on corrupt demand and obtaining of N4 million by false pretence before Justice Sherifat Solebo of the Special Offences Court in Ikeja. She however denied the alleged offence.

 

The defendant, lawyer to one, Kelechi Uka, currently under investigation by the EFCC was alleged to have collected N4 million from one, Henry Umoh, supposedly to influence officers of the Commission to secure Uka’s release. Uka is standing trial on offences relating to stealing at the Lagos State High Court.

 

Count one of the charge reads in part: “That you, Taiwo Oreagba, on or about the 2nd of March, 2020 in Lagos , within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, whilst acting as    counsel to one one, Henry George Umoh”. Following the defendant’s plea, she was granted bail and trial commenced. But, during trial, Justice Solebo recused herself from hearing the case and it was sent back to the Chief Judge for reassignment. The case was subsequently assigned to Justice Taiwo.

 

At the resumed hearing of the case before the new judge, EFCC’s lawyer, Emeka Akaogu, called five witnesses who alleged that the defendant took advantage of her position as a lawyer to make corrupt demand from Umoh that she was capable of influencing EFCC officials to give a soft landing to Uka or no charge against Uka if he was able to raise the sum if N4million.

 

One of the exhibits provided by the prosecution and which was played several times in court, was an audio recording wherein a voice said the money was meant for EFCC officials.

 

Umoh who testified as second prosecution witness (PW2) disclosed that the money the defendant allegedly demanded from him was not her professional fees, but money she purported would be given and was given to EFCC officers.

 

At the close of prosecution’s case, the defence lawyer, Mahmood Adesina (SAN) entered a ‘no case’ submission, arguing that the money was Oreagba’s professional fees. He argued, among others, that the PW2 stated under cross-examination that he did not give a bribe to any EFCC officers.

The silk contended that this fundamentally contradicted the other witnesses who testified that the money was meant to influence officers of the Commission. But the prosecution opposed him, argu-ing that the charge before the court was not a charge for bribery, but was brought under Section 10 of the ICPC Act, 2000, for corrupt demand by persons and under Section 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006.

The EFCC contended further that the defendant had earlier stated at some point in her extra-judicial statement that the said N4 million was for restitution. The agency stated further that in the audio recording, she was heard categorically stating the money was meant for EFCC officers.

 

In her ruling on the ‘no case’ submission, Justice Taiwo noted that she had listened to the evidence of the five prosecutions witnesses as well the exhibits, adding that she had heard the audio conversation where the defendant referred to the money as being meant for EFCC officers.

 

The court also observed that it had seen the extra-judicial statement of the defendant where she referred to the N4 million to be meant for restitution and then in the defendant’s address where the money was said to be her professional fees.

 

“These are questions that need answers from the defendant, hence, the no case submission fails”, the judge held. Further hearing in the matter has been adjourned to March 10 and 11, 2022 for the defence to open its case

Read Previous

Court affirms Bola-Audu authentic ASCSN President

Read Next

Ending era of secrecy in managing judiciary’s fund

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *