Justice Lifu adjourned the matter after both the prosecution and defence counsel have adopted thier respective written addresses on whether or not to hear the charge first or the objection to the charge filed by the defendant’s lawyer.
It would be recalled that on the last adjourned date, Justice Peter Lifu had asked counsel to both parties to address him on the contending issue of Section 396 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA and fixed today for the adoption of the written addresses.
At the resume hearing of the matter today, after counsel had informed the court that they have filed thier respective address on the contending issue as directed by the court, were given to go-ahead to adopt same and Justice Lifu consequently adjourned the matter till March 11 for ruling .
Justice Lifu had on December 3, last year raised the issue of Section 396 of ACJA and asked the counsel to addresses him on it when the defendant brought an application to quash the charge against her without first taking her plea before the court.The office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) had dragged 11 defendants before the court on charges bordering on Conspiracy, Obtaining by false pretence and fraud of $32 million USD.
The Charge and the proof of evidence failed to disclose any prima facie case and/or link or connect the 7th and 10th Defendants/Applicants to the commission of the alleged offences charged.
The Police Investigation Report sufficiently cleared the 7th and 10th Defendants/Applicants from the commission of the alleged offences.
The 7th Defendant/Applicant is a clean, clear and responsible personality in the society and it will be unfair and unjust to drag her name and that of her Company (the 10th Defendant/Applicant) doing a lawful business into a criminal trial for offences they know nothing about.
The essence of this objection is to terminate the proceedings without this Honourable Court dissipating unnecessary energies to consider this unworthy and fruitless matter as it relates to the 7th and 10th Defendants/Applicants.
The justice of this case demands that the names of the 7th and 10th Defendants/Applicants be struck out from the charge.
The 7th and 10th Defendants/Applicants shall rely on the charge together with all other processes, Statements, Reports and documents filed by the prosecution in this case for the hearing of this application.