Court jails Senator Nwaoboshi for money laundering
The Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal yesterday convicted and sentenced Senator Peter Nwaoboshi, representing Delta North at the National Assembly, to seven years in prison over offences of money laundering.
The court also ordered that his two companies, Golden Touch Construction Project Ltd and Suiming Electrical Ltd, be wound up in line with the provisions of section 22 of the Money Laundering
Prohibition Act, 2021.
The appellate court’s ruling followed the success of the appeal by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) challenging the judgement of Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court, which on June 18, 2021, discharged and acquitted the defendants of a two-count charge of fraud and money laundering.
The EFCC had arraigned the three defendants over the acquisition of a property named Guinea House, Marine Road, in Apapa, Lagos at N805million. Part of the money paid to the vendor, precisely a sum of N322m transferred by Suiming Electrical Ltd on behalf of Nwaoboshi and Golden
Touch Construction Project Ltd, was alleged to be part of proceeds of fraud.
But in his judgement, Justice Aneke held that the prosecution failed to call vital witnesses and tender concrete evidence to prove the elements of the offences for which it charged the defendants.
Justice Aneke said the evidence of PW2 “proved that the third defendant obtained a loan of N1.2billion from Zenith Bank for the purchase of additional equipment and provision of working capital.
“It also proved that the loan of N1.2bn, together with an interest of N24m, was properly granted to the third. Nothing else was proved by the complainant or prosecutor in this case,” the judge said.
He claimed that a fatal blow was dealt the case of the prosecution by its failure to call officials of Sterling Bank “to testify and probably tender exhibits F and F10”.
Consequently, he discharged and acquitted the defendants.
However, ruling on the EFCC’s appeal yesterday, the Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in dismissing the charges against the respondents. It said the prosecution had proved the ingredients of the offence and consequently found the defendants guilty as charged.