FG arraigns ex- Eunisell staff, Amadi over alleged N2.9b fraud

THE Chief Executive Officer of ABD Energy Solutions Limited, Kenneth Ndubuisi Amadi, was on Wednesday arraigned by the Federal Government before Justice Mohammed Liman of a Federal High Court in Lagos for alleged N2.9 billion fraud.

Mr Amadi, an ex- employee of Eunisell Limited was docked alongside a firm, IDID Nigeria Limited.

The defendant’s arraignment on a 5- count charge bordering on the alleged offence was coming more than a year after the charge was filed in 2019. This was due to Amadi’s continuous absence in court to take his plea.

Prior to the defendant’s arraignment, the court had turned down a request by his counsel, Emeka Etiaba ( SAN), through a motion, to have the charge quashed for being an abuse of court’s process.

Drawing the court’s attention to the motion, which was filed on February 2, 2021, Etiaba argued that it was brought pursuant to Section 36 ( 5) of the Constitution as well as Sections 1 ( 1) and 221 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act ( ACJA). He added that the purpose of the motion was for the court to filter the proof of evidence and other documents attached to the case to ensure that the accused person was not punished unjustly.

“The provisions of ACJA are subject to constitutional provisions and anything that will curtail the rights of the defendants must be guard against by the court. The provisions of the Constitution are superior to ACJA’S provisions. This motion is deeply rooted in the Constitution”, the silk further added.

Responding, FG’S counsel, Aderonke Imana, while expressing her opposition to the motion said the business of the day was the arraignment of the accused person. She argued that the court could only look into the motion after the arraignment.

She said: “We are objecting to the motion. Section 396 ( 2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act ( ACJA) stated that such a motion can only be taken by the court after arraignment. The charge has been filed since 2019 and the defendant has never shown up in court before today. We urge the court to order the reading of the charge to the defendant”.

In a bench ruling, Justice Liman held that there’s no way the arraignment of the defendant can infringe on his fundamental rights. He noted that arraignment is only a part of criminal proceedings and not an aspect of trial.

“The process of arraignment does not involve the proof of facts and whatever decision was taken by the defendant will determine the trajectory of facts. The defendant’s lawyer misconstrued the spirit behind Section 36 ( 5) of the Constitution. I don’t see how the defendant’s arraignment can infringe on his fundamental rights.