Ngillari’s Bail in Order, Says Civil Society Group
Sunday Okobi
Coalition of Civil Society and Media Executives for Media Stability (COCMEP) has described as false and mischievous public speculations that the bail granted the immediate past Governor of Adamawa State, Bala Ngillari, was manipulated through forged documents by prison officials.
In a statement signed by Executive Director of COCMEP, Innocent Okadigbo, and made available to THISDAY, the group stated that based on their investigation, the same state High Court Judge in Yola which convicted the ex-governor on March 6, 2017, exercised his discretion pursuant to order 342(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to grant the bail after examining the motion and affidavits for the bail, medical records from Nigerian and foreign hospitals on Ngillari’s ailments for over six years, report of the failing health condition of the former governor in Yola Prison and counter-affidavit from the office of the Attorney-General of the state.
The civil society group exonerated the Yola Prison staff of any blame and wrongdoing in the matter “because they merely responded to the court warrant explaining why they could not produce Ngillari in the court due to his bad and failing health condition.”
According to Okadigbo, “It could have amounted to administrative dereliction of duty and judicial contempt of court if the prison staff did not respond to the court warrant to produce the ex-governor in court, and as such, the Prison headquarters should clear their Yola staff of any wrongdoing for carrying out their lawful duties.
“If there was any wrongdoing by the prison staff, the judge would have noted it and punished the staff accordingly,” the statement added.
Okadigbo blamed the aftermath which followed the bail and the punishment of Yola Prison staff on the former governor’s political traducers who are hell-bent in punishing him for certain vested interests, urging the entire public to discountenance the speculations that Yola Prison staff forged documents for Ngillari’s bail which he described as spurious and wicked.
He further claimed that there is no such forged document and challenged anybody to produce and tender such forged document publicly.
The statement further stated that the judge took note of part of the motion which stated that Ngillari’s appeal pending at the Court of Appeal is recondite and substantial, and cited Section 58 (5) of the supposed law as one of the issues to be determined by the Court of Appeal as to whether Ngillari’s conviction was in order.