A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday struck out a bail application
filed by Ifeanyi Uba, the CEO, Capital Oil and Gas, and four others
charged with N43.29 billion fuel subsidy fraud.
Others charged with Uba are Nsika Usoro, Godfrey Okorie, Chibuzor
Ogbuokiri, and Joseph Orji, all employees of the Capital Oil and Gas.
The men, being prosecuted by the Nigeria Police Special Fraud Unit
(SFU) before a Tinubu Magistrates’ Court in Lagos, were on October 11
ordered to be remanded in the custody of the SFU for 14 days.
Uba and the others were charged with economic sabotage, obtaining
money by false pretences, stealing of N43.291 billion, property of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, money laundering and forgery.
Justice Okon Abang, in his ruling described the application as incompetent and defective.
Abang also stated that counsel to the applicant, Mr Joseph Nwobike
(SAN), had failed to inform the court that the applicants were detained
on a subsisting order of remand, made by Magistrate Martins Owumi.
He said that this fact was not deposed to by the applicants’ counsel in their affidavit of urgency before the court.
“I have gone through the affidavit filed by the applicants’ counsel,
and I find no place where it is stated that there was a subsisting order
for remand by the magistrate court.I cannot possibly comprehend why the
learned SAN has chosen to hide this fact from the court,” he said.
He also stated that although the applicants could bring an
application for bail before the court, they could not do so under the
Fundamental Human Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules.
“Where bail is refused an applicant at the magistrates’ court, he has
the right to bring his application before a higher court, but he has to
do so within the confines of the law.
“I cannot make findings on the bail application of the applicants,
brought pursuant to the Fundamental Human Rights Enforcement Procedure
Rules.
“The applicants cannot use this rule to challenge a subsisting order
of court. Whether the magistrate had or exceeded his jurisdiction is
entirely a different issue,’’ Abang said.
According to him, the learned SAN should have employed either of three modes in bringing his bail application before this court;
The judge said that the applicants should have appealed against the
order for remand made by the magistrate before the high court, pending
the arraignment of the applicants.
He said that they could also have sent an application to the high
court for a fresh summons for bail, pursuant to Section 118 of the
Criminal Procedure Act (CPA).
“I cannot consider counsel’s application for the applicants to be
released on bail under the fundamental rights enforcement procedure;
this relief cannot be sought under that law.
“This is not a sentimental or emotional issue. It is an issue of law because there already is a subsisting order of court.
“The police possess the constitutional right to arrest any person
accused of committing an offence, even if it is based on suspicion.
“In the final analysis, the preliminary objection of the respondent
subsists in part and the application of the applicants struck out, with
no order as to cost. I so hold” Abang ruled.
Meanwhile, it will be recalled that the Presidential Committee on the
Verification and Reconciliation of Fuel Subsidy Payments had indicted
Uba and some other oil marketers and companies of financial impropriety.
(NAN)
No comments:
Post a Comment