As Orji Uzor Kalu Returns to the Dock

•Kalu                                                                  •Lamorde

 

By Joe Nwankwo Assistant Editor, Abuja

With the decision of the Court of Appeal Abuja Division, which on Friday, April 27 held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) can prosecute former Governor of Abia State, Orji Uzor Kalu, efforts by the commission to prosecute former governors and other political office holders standing trial over allegations of graft has received a new momentum.

The appellate court in that decision held that the anti-graft agency had established prime facie case against the defendant.

The ex-governor had approached the court asking it to set aside the ruling of the Federal High Court, which held that he had a case to answer.

Some of the issues raised for determination by Kalu’s counsel, Awa Kalu (SAN), included the declaration by the appeal court that the appellants (Kalu and Slok Nigeria Limited) were arraigned on a non-existent law and that the proof of evidence did not disclose a prima facie case against them.

He also argued that since the Abia State High Court had issued an ex parte motion on the matter, the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the case.

He also sought the leave of the appellate court to enforce his fundamental human rights by declaring his arrest, detention, and arraignment a nullity.

The former governor’s company, Slok Nigeria Ltd, sought similar leave as it also asked the court to determine whether the EFCC and the Federal Government were competent to prosecute a case involving the revenue of a state.

In a unanimous ruling read by Ejembi Eko on behalf of Kayode Bada and Regina Nwodo, the appellate court resolved all the grounds of appeal in favour of the respondent, EFCC, and dismissed the appeal for lack of merit.

Eko noted that the proof of evidence attached to the 97-count charge preferred against the appellants by the EFCC disclosed a prima facie case against the former governor and others.

He further said that as far as there was a link, which is what prima facie is all about, the appellants had an obligation to stand trial to defend themselves.

He ruled that the ex parte order of May 31, 2007 by the State High Court, asking the Federal High Court to stay all proceedings against Kalu was a racquet suit aimed at frustrating his arrest and subsequent prosecution.

Describing the ex parte motion as an abuse of court process, the judge stated that the order was “an order at large, personal rather than definite. It was an order made as an ex parte and not at the course of trial.”

On whether EFCC had the competence to charge the appellants, the court maintained that both the EFCC Establishment Act and the Money Laundering and Prohibition Act, had given the commission powers to prosecute offenders.

In his reaction to the ruling, prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, expressed satisfaction with the judgment, noting that the appeal court ruling had vindicated his position that the Abia High Court order was intended to protect Kalu from prosecution and exposed the hollowness of the position of the former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Michael Andoakaa that the order must be obeyed.

It would be recalled that Kalu was on July 27, 2007, formally charged before an Abuja Federal High Court on a 107-count charge of corrupt enrichment and money laundering before Binta Murtala Nyako for allegedly laundering N5billion belonging to Abia State.

The EFCC had accused Kalu of transferring billions of naira belonging to the state government to Slok Airline over a period of time.

According to the charge, Kalu transferred money belonging to the state government account in the defunct Manny Bank (now part of Fidelity Bank) to Slok Airline account at Inland Bank.

The former Abia governor was also alleged to have at various times between 1999 and 2007 transferred huge sums of government money into Slok Investment, Slok Nigeria Limited, Slok Incorporated and other companies owned by him.

His lawyers had contended that the former governor was not charged with diverting N5billion belonging to the state government while he was governor.

They insist the charge brought against the businessman and politician by the EFCC is actually for N2.8billion.

According to the lawyers, even though their client is still faulting the entire trial as “illegal” and lacking in evidence, “it would be proper to put the records straight,” as there was never any mention of N5billion in the charge sheet.

“What is on the charge sheet, which formed the basis of the written addresses made by both the prosecution and defence counsel to the judge was N2.8billion,” the lawyers said.

While Kalu’s lawyers are asking for the case to be struck out on the ground that the prosecution lacked any evidence to link their client to any such diversions – if it ever took place, and that the trial is illegal ab initio, having commenced in flagrance of the order of an Umuahia High Court – the EFCC is saying that it does not only have evidence, but that the Abuja court is competent to entertain the case.

Although the ex-governor’s counsel say they are at a loss as to where the media got their figure from, they reason that it may have been picked from the oral submission of EFCC counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, part of which was based on the schedule of transaction obtained from a bank and which did not really give a true picture of the actual figure on the charge sheet.

However, the counsel said, “It is good to know that a section of the media got the figure right. Kalu was not charged based on any other documents beside what is now before the court.

With the barrage of loses recorded by the EFCC in the past few months like in the case against the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dimeji Bankole, and the former Managing Director of the Intercontinental Bank, PLC, Erastus Akingbola, where the courts threw out the case for its shoddy prosecution and berated the commission, the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Kalu’s case would serve as the necessary tonic that would encourage the commission to do a better job.

The EFCC had recently come under a lot of fire from within the country and the international scene for what people perceived as an agenda in the war against graft.

Many saw the Farida Waziri years as an apology of what the commission was expected to be. They saw anti-corruption fight in the country as a mockery especially since no major progress was made in any case of fraud the commission had embarked on prosecution.

Investigations seemed shoddy as the commission rushed to prosecute suspected financial wrongdoers without proper investigation; the leadership was viewed as too powerful at a time; accusations of witch-hunting were rife; the international community frowned at the commission’s methods of fighting graft; accusations of graft even within the commission were rumoured among many other things.

While many saw the years of pioneer EFCC Chairman, Nuhu Ribadu, as daring, they mostly regarded Waziri’s war against graft as playing to the gallery, a war fought on the pages of newspapers.

The specific challenge before incumbent chairman, Ibrahim Lamorde, having inherited an EFCC that many perceive to be grossly failing in its mandate, is that having been a pioneer member of the team, which laid the foundation for the commission, much will be expected from him.

He is expected to provide the bite necessary to bring to book corrupt officials without necessarily playing to the gallery.

The case against Kalu, who turned 52 on Saturday, April 21, would serve as a test case on the determination of the Federal Government and the leadership of the commission to fight corruption in a just but effective manner in the country.

The ex-governor however said he is prepared to prove his innocence but that the EFCC should not engage in media trial, adding: “Let the EFCC prove that I am guilty based on facts and figures and not just mentioning ridiculous figures it claimed I stole to draw public sympathy.”

Speaking through his Special Adviser (Media), Emeka Obasi, Kalu said, “So far, it is obvious that what the EFCC is craving for is public acclaim that it is working. From my over-publicised arrest, even when I was always available, creating the impression that I was on the run from the commission, to the undue publicity given to a case in which the commission knows it has no fact to sustain its claim, the EFCC is only playing to the gallery and pandering to the wishes of those who feel I stood in their ways to pauperise this country when they were in power.

“This present trial will not make me change my position to keep fighting for a better Nigeria where all will benefit from our commonwealth. It will also not deter me from fighting and speaking against injustice in the country and speaking on behalf of the common man who is at the receiving end of bad governance. I am waiting for the EFCC to prove its case. I certainly know that like those beating the drum for the EFCC, this too shall pass away.”

All the parties shall again meet in court.

Source: Daily Independence