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.
