EFCC Opposes Akingbola’s Bid To Quash N41.1b Fraud Charge

The bid by the former Managing Director of the defunct Intercontinental Bank PLC, Dr. Erastus Akingbola and his co-defendant, Bayo Dada to have the 18 count charges pending against them at a Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja quashed was on Wednesday vehemently opposed by the Economic and Finance Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Chief Godwin Obla (SAN), counsel to EFCC while opposing the two applications filed by the defendants wherein they urged Justice Lateef Lawal-Akapo to dismiss the charge because according to them it was an abuse of court process, said that Section 251 (1) (2) (3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria do not confer exclusive jurisdiction on matters involving offences to which the defendants were charged on Federal High Court alone.
“The drafters of the constitution were not stupid when they refused to confer exclusive jurisdiction on Federal High Court. There is no exclusive jurisdiction conferred on Federal High Court as criminal matters particularly as regards cases listed in subsection 3 of the section”, Mr. Obla stated.
Chief Obla also faulted defendants’ allusion to Court of Appeal judgment in the case of Mr. Okey Nwosu Vs Federal Republic of Nigeria, insisting that the judgment was based on wrong premise. According to him, the 2013 Court of Appeal judgment was based on a similar judgment earlier delivered by the court in the case of Eze Vs Federal of Nigeria. Obla maintained that a Supreme Court verdict had actually upturned the position of the Court of Appeal before the appellate court gave the verdict.  “This court cannot therefore follow a decision that is expired”, he told the court.
On the application by the second defendant, Bayo Dada, Mr. Obla said he was slammed with charges bothering on advance fee fraud. He maintained that Section 14 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act 2006, confer mutual jurisdiction on both Federal High Court as well state high courts. “My Lord these applications ought not to have been brought in the first place, but since they have been brought I urge the court to strike them out in entirety”, he told the court.
Earlier, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) had told the court that the charges upon which his clients were charged was an abuse of court process. It was his contention that the offences his clients were alleged to have committed were actually carried out in the course capital market transactions. He insisted that based on the provisions of the law, the alleged culprits should have been charged before a Federal High Court.
According to Chief Olanipekun, “subsection 3 of the section in contention flows directly from subsection 1 and 2. The section do not in any way confer jurisdiction on the state high court. The word also used in subsection 3 is in addition to subsection 2. If subsection 1 is exclusive then subsection 3 should also be exclusive”.
Also counsel to Mr. Dada, Professor Taiwo Osipitan (SAN),told the court that charges slammed on his client were advance fee fraud in form but capital market in substance. He aligned with Chief Olanipekun in urging to dismiss the charge.         
Justice Lawal-Akapo will on 2nd May, 2014 deliver his ruling on the applications.