Judgment day in Kaduna

THE over one-month break between the court session of December 16, 2004 and what happened at the resumed hearing on January 26, 2005 showed that the seriousness of the case was not lost on anyone. When the court session opened on January 26, 2005, the accused were once again asked to take the guilty or not guilty pleas, after the new charges were read to them. This time, Chief Dariye’s name was not mentioned. Hon. Justice Liman immediately dismissed the objection by Professor Nwabueze that the entire trial should be discontinued since the principal accused had immunity and could not be tried while in office as the governor of Plateau State. Hon. Justice Liman overruled him and ordered continuation of the case. The EFCC prosecution team led Mr. Ibrahim Lamode, EFCC’S Director of Operatios, in evidence. Mr. Lamode, in turn called Detective Constable Peter Clark, a British police officer attached to the Special Investigation Unit of Scotland Yard, to present his evidence. Mr. Clark called on his assistant, Mr. Robert Ingram, another officer from the London Metropolitan Police in the United Kingdom, to present evidence of how funds were transferred from Nigeria into the accounts of Chief Joshua Dariye in the United Kingdom. It was easy to ask how a London policeman came to play a leading role in the investigation of a state governor and local bankers in Nigeria.

Mr. Ingram explained that the instant case was triggered by an investigation into the banking transactions of Chief Dariye in the United Kingdom in January 2004. The facts revealed by the British police were that on January 20, 2004, while conducting a search at No. 127, Chiltern House, Portland Street, London, SE17, in connection with a suspected case of theft of computer equipment via internet purchase, the Metropolitan Police found some money in a locked briefcase. The money was said to belong to one Christopher Mekwunye who claimed that Chief Dariye gave him the money so he could deposit it into his account with Barclays Bank, London. Further search revealed documents including a Barclays Bank account statement in the name of Chief Joshua Chibi Dariye, showing a healthy credit balance in the account. Subsequent search conducted showed that Chief Dariye operated eight bank accounts in the United Kingdom, seven of which were in British pounds sterling while one was in United States dollars. The accounts had various sizeable credit balances. Based on the report of the police investigation, Chief Dariye was arrested on September 2, 2004, in his hotel room at the Marriott Hotel in London. It was the investigation of how these funds got into Chief Dariye’s accounts that led to the evidence being tendered at the trial.

Mr. Clark told the court that Chief Dariye used seven Nigerian banks to process money transfers into his various accounts. He listed the banks as Diamond Bank, African International Bank, Lion Bank, Standard Trust Bank, Hallmark Bank, Gulf Bank and Allstates Trust Bank. He added that the transfers were made between January 7, 2000 and January 10, 2001. The Metropolitan Police report also gave details of how Chief Dariye acquired a property known as Flat 28, Regents Plaza, Apartment 8, Grenville Road, London NW6 in September 2001, under the assumed name of Mr. Joseph Dagwan. Using animated flow charts, Mr. Clark showed how the funds moved from the listed accounts in Nigeria into the account of the correspondent bank overseas, through the complicated web of international payment system, and were credited to the bank accounts of Chief Dariye in the United Kingdom. When Mr. Chike Okoroma, the EFCC lead counsel, was asked why only Allstates Trust Bank was being prosecuted out of the seven banks, he said it was the prerogative of the state to decide whoever it wishes to prosecute. Thereafter, Mr. Okoroma led the EFCC’S Mr. Bello Bamanga in evidence, to explain how the account of Ebenezer Retnan Ventures was opened in Allstates Trust Bank without the bank staff verifying the identity of the owner and the address of the company. In his testimony, Mr. Adewusi James Olanrewaju, a principal accountant in the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF,) revealed that the CBN cheque of N1,161,162,900 (one billion, one hundred and sixty-one million, one hundred and sixty-two thousand and nine hundred Naira) collected by Chief Dariye, on behalf of Plateau State, was drawn from the Ecological Fund Account of the federal government, for flood channelisation and rehabilitation of mines in Jos, capital of Plateau state.

In his response, my counsel, Dr. Alex Izinyon, SAN, argued that the trial was not being conducted properly. He informed the court that the ruling of Hon. Justice Liman for the trial to continue after removing Chief Dariye, governor of Plateau, State, as one of the accused persons, was being challenged at the Federal Court of Appeal in Kaduna. He, therefore, asked Hon. Justice Liman to adjourn indefinitely, pending the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal. After listening to the counsels for the accused persons, Hon. Justice Liman ruled that the court would not grant an indefinite adjournment. The hearing was then adjourned to February 7, 2005. At the resumed hearing on February 7, 2005, which began sitting at 2.00 pm, the EFCC filed the amended charges in respect of Charge No. FHC/ KD/143C/04 and Charge No. FHC/KD/144C/04, thereby striking out Chief Joshua Chibi Dariye, governor of Plateau and Mrs. Dorothy Uko, the Abuja area manager of Allstates Trust Bank, as accused persons. In the amended charge, the accused persons were now six, with me as the No. 3 accused person. Messrs. Awe Odesa and Duate Iyabi were nos. 1 and 2, respectively. Allstates Trust Bank Plc was No. 4; Mr. Adonye Roberts was no. 5 and Mr. Samuel Osivemu was no. 6. I remained the no. 3 accused person, from the moment of this amendment, until the final judgment was delivered.

On March, 2, 2005, my defence team moved a motion on notice before Hon. Justice Liman, that myself, as the 3rd Accused/applicant, was not ready to be tried on the amended Charge No. FHC/ KD/143C/04, containing two counts, and amended Charge No. FHC/KD/144C/04, containing four counts. Both charges were filed on February 3, 2005. The grounds for my refusal to be tried, based on the amended charges, were:

1) My defence would be highly prejudiced as my one and only witness in the case was Chief Joshua Chibi Dariye, the governor of Plateau State, a serving governor who could not be summoned or subpoenaed to testify for my defence.

2) That the conduct of the prosecutor/prosecution in the case would be prejudicial to my defence if the trial were to continue based on the amended charge.

3) That all the witnesses that had testified in this matter before the 7th day of February 2005 had mentioned the said Chief Joshua Chibi Dariye and his involvement in the charges before the court.

4) That I would be highly prejudiced and my fundamental human rights guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria would be infringed upon if I was denied, by no fault of mine, the opportunity to call my sole witness in the case or have the opportunity of cross-examining him before the case was closed and judgment given.

5) That the case be adjourned sine die until such a time and period when my defence would not be prejudiced by the availability of Chief Joshua Dariye to testify for me in the case.

To support the motion on notice, I deposed to a 17-point affidavit at the Federal High Court in Kaduna. Although Hon. Justice Liman had ruled on January 26, 2005, against our application for an indefinite stay of proceedings; my defence team had earlier in the day of February 7, 2005, at 10.00 am precisely, filed and presented its argument at the Federal Court of Appeal in Kaduna, challenging the continuation of the trial by Hon. Justice Liman. The Federal High Court and Federal Court of Appeal are located at the two ends of the same premises in Kaduna. The appeal filed by the defence team on February 7, 2005 was in respect of the two charges and based on two grounds each. The first “was against the decision of the learned trial Judge of the Federal High Court, Kaduna delivered on 16th December, 2004 (in charge No: FHC/ KD/143C/04) wherein after the Court suo moto ordered that the 1st accused should appear and address the Court on the applicability of Section 308 of the Constitution and on the application of the 1st accused person’s counsel, the court struck out the charges against the 1st accused and discharged him pursuant to the provision of Section 308 of the Constitution. On the spot, after delivering his considered ruling, the learned trial judge struck out the 1st accused person who is the governor of Plateau State and ordered that the trial should proceed against the other accused persons without any opportunity given to the counsels of the accused persons to address it on the propriety or otherwise of proceeding with the trial, without the 1st accused person, having regards to the nature of the charges whom the trial Judge had even in the ruling described as the principal accused person.”

The Appeal Court was requested to rule “whether the holding by the learned trial judge that there being no challenge to the validity of the charges against the other accused persons was not a denial of the appellant’s right of fair hearing” and, secondly, “whether the trial Judge had jurisdiction to continue adjudicating/trial of the appellant having struck out the 1st accused person having regards to the remaining offences/ charges before the court.” The second ground of appeal was “against the decision of the learned trial Judge of the Federal High Court, Kaduna delivered on 16th December,