Justice Nicholas Oweibo of the Federal High Court Lagos has fixed August 17 to rule on Federal Government’s application seeking to withdraw the illegal possession of firearms charge filed against the suspended Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Godwin Emefiele.
The judge fixed the date after listening to arguments of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) and counsel of the Ministry of Justice, Mohammed Abubakar and Emefiele’s counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN.)
On the last adjourned date, the matter was slated for Tuesday, August 15, for the hearing of pending applications seeking to stay the execution of the bail and application compelling the complainant to obey the court orders.
When the matter came up, yesterday, the DPP made an oral application to the court to withdraw the charges against Emefiele.
He stated that the application was informed by emerging facts and for circumstances that need further investigations and urged the court to grant the application.
Abubakar said the application was pursuant to Sections 174 (1) (c) (2) and 108 (2) (4).
But the defence counsel, Daudu disagreed with the prosecution’s oral application, arguing that the government was in disobedience of the court’s order which granted Emefiele bail, so its application could not be taken.
“There is no application before the court, there is no doubt and I am not disputing the facts that the state can withdraw any charge before the court against any person.”
He cited Section 174 (3) of the Constitution that the AGF has power that can be devoid to any of it’s officers.
“We have an application that the AGF has flouted the court order which say the respondent/ defendant should be remanded at the Nigeria Correctional Service granted but they are not obeying the order. The court granted order of substituted service to be published in three national dailies and after they brought an application of stay of execution of the bail and we say unless they obey the court’s order, Section 174 (1) can only be by nolle prosequi. It must be in writing, I have never heard of the withdrawal of a case without a nolle prosequi for the interest of justice we need to prevent abuse of legal processes. I urge the court to reject the application and order the learned DPP to go on with today’s business,” he said.
While responding to the defence argument, the DPP said nolle prosequi was different from withdrawal and cited Section 108 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law 2015.
The judge had on July 25, admitted Emefiele to a N20 million bail on a two-count charge of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition and ordered his remand at the Ikoyi Correctional Centre, pending when he is able to perfect his bail conditions.
But the DSS rearrested the embattled bank chief after fighting off NCoS officials on the court’s premises.
The government has filed fresh charges against Emefiele in Abuja.
Speaking with journalists after the proceedings the DPP said, “we are withdrawing the charge because of emerging facts pending further investigations at the end of which we will probably come back with more charges and more counts.”
“On the basis of this the fact that he is also being investigated for other offences, and there is also another pending charge at the FCT high court as we speak. So all these combined slow down the process of complying with the order of the court. The new charge may contain unlawful possession of firearms among others.
On the charge at the FCT, he said “ we have filed a 20-count charge against the defendant, which bothers on unlawful procurement under the ICPC Act, and taking unlawful advantage.
Speaking on the alleged charge filed against Emefiele in the Federal Capital Territory, his lawyer Daudu SAN said “ What we have not seen and what has not been served on us, to us is fiction. When we see it, we deal with it.
He said “What is on ground today is the disrespect to the court. That disgraceful incident that all of you witnessed should not be left unattended to and the Court fixed today to hear the issues.
“That disrespect to the court must be washed away and cannot be wished away.
Before any step can be taken including withdrawal of the charge. There is a greater issue, are the court to be used like tissue paper blow your nose in it and throw it away?
‘The courts are more than that. We came prepared but they ambushed us with an oral application for withdrawal. There is no difference between withdrawal and nolle prosequi . Is the Attorney General that exercises the power, one is baptismal name for another. The constitution says that before you withdraw, you must be seen to be acting in public interest, in the interest of Justice and must not be an abuse of court process.”
According to him,” in my humble view, when you have trammelled the order of court, disgraced a fellow brother agency by dragging one of their officer and threw him in a waiting vehicle, and that issue is before the Court. And you think that issue can be avoided by merely withdrawing the charge and everybody will go and sleep.
“I am sorry to say that any other step including withdrawal cannot be attended to until that temerity and disgrace shown to the court is dealt with,” he stated.
