Following jubilation that erupted after last Friday’s Supreme Court notification of Orji Kalu’s conviction over an alleged N7.1 billion fraud, a former 2nd Vice President, Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Monday Onyekachi Ubani, has warned that the ruling was just a temporary relief and that it does not quash allegations of corrupt diversion of state funds filed by the Economic Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) against the former governor of Abia State.
Barr. Ubani made this disclosure in a recent press statement released to The Nigerian Xpress, where he advised the two parties seeking judicature at the courts on the way forward after the Supreme Court’s ruling. “the Prosecution, EFCC should assemble all its witnesses once again and be prepared to commence trial afresh after the Chief judge has assigned the case to a new judge entirely.
“The judgment did not say that Orji is acquitted and discharged from the offense of the alleged fraud. He still has to face his trial anew.
Then the Defendants, “Senator Orji Uzo Kalu, this is a temporary relief and if he succeeds in defending himself successfully over the allegation of fraudulent misappropriation of Abia’s treasury, it will be hosanna for him and his co-accused. We will, as usual, follow up this case until it is finally disposed of either way. and believe me, it will still end at the supreme court if EFCC is serious with their threat, ” he added.
READ ALSO: https://www.thexpressng.com/2020/05/11/kano-returnee-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-in-osun/
Dissecting reasons on why the court freed Kalu, Ubani disclosed that the trial court erred seriously in the handling of Orji’s matter and led to the nullification of the conviction and sentence secured by the trial judge. “Recall that one Justice Mohammed Idris who is now at the Court of Appeal was the trial judge at the Federal High Court Ikoyi of the criminal trial of Senator Orji Kalu.
“In the course of the trial that lasted several years, about 12 years he was subsequently elevated to the Court of Appeal.
“Orji’s trial appeared stalled until the President of the Court Appeal invoked a section of the Administration of Criminal Act, 2015 that empowered her to grant a fiat to the learned Judge to go back to the Federal High Court to conclude the trial. Justice Idris dutifully did that which led to Orji’s conviction and sentence.
“However, at the Supreme Court, the noble learned Justices held that the judge who concluded the trial had no jurisdiction as the said fiat he was given to conclude the trial was inconsistent with the provision of the constitution that a judge of the Court Of Appeal cannot ‘descend’ to also be a judge of the Federal High Court.
“In other words, the composition of the trial court was at variance with the provision of the constitution that gives jurisdiction to the Federal High Court.
“The meticulous eyes of the judges of the Supreme Court saw the aberration and did not hesitate to so hold.”
According to Ubani, what the judgment said is that the trial of Orji and others should start at the Federal High Court before a different and new judge assigned by the Chief Judge of that court from the beginning.
“Please note that jurisdiction is a threshold issue, and either a court has one or it does not have it, and whenever the issue is raised even if for the first time at the supreme court and found to be lacking the Supreme Court will and has always nullify such trial.
READ ALSO: https://www.thexpressng.com/2020/05/11/ogun-increases-health-workers-hazard-allowance/
“The judgment is sound and there is no basis to criticise it except on a sentimental basis. It cannot be faulted legally.
“The people that drafted and inserted the section that permits a trial judge that has been elevated to continue with the trial at the trial court meant well, but they should have also persuaded the amendment of the constitution by the legislature on the issue of the jurisdiction of the trial court in the circumstance.
“This omission is very grave and anyone defending that the amendment should have been allowed to stand even after offending the constitution is a very strange argument. jurisdiction is key to every case in Nigeria”
