Niger Delta militant warlord, Tompolo, who had been declared wanted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, will soon know his fate as a Federal High Court has fixed his judgement day.
Tompolo & Buhari
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday fixed June 19 to deliver judgment in a suit filed by Chief Government Ekpemulopo, alias Tompolo, seeking the enforcement of his rights.
Joined as respondents in the suit are the Inspector-General of
Police, the Chief of Army Staff, the EFCC, the Chief of Naval Staff and
the Chief of Air Staff.
On Thursday, Justice Mojisola Olatoregun reserved judgment in the suit after hearing arguments from counsel.
Adopting his originating processes, counsel to the first and second
respondents, Mr T.A Mofolu, argued that the provisions of the
Administration of Criminal Justice Act, provides for speedy criminal
trials.
According to him, the law provides that an accused has a right of appeal where he is not at par with the decision of a court.
He said in this case the respondent was aware of an appeal filed by the applicant.
He also objected to the attachment of a newspaper publication in
the applicant’s further affidavit dated June 16, 2016 on the grounds
that such piece of evidence was secondary and ought to be certified at
the National library.
Mofolu, therefore, urged the court to dismiss the application for lack of merit.
But counsel to the EFCC, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, submitted that the
applicant in question was a “fugitive” in law and should not be allowed
to seek redress from the court until he submitted himself for trial.
He argued that given the materials placed before the court, it was
clear that the applicant was s in clear contempt of the order of Justice
Ibrahim Buba, who had earlier compelled his attendance in court to
answer charges preferred against him.
Oyedepo described the application as an abuse of court process,
saying “it is trite that a party who is in contempt of court cannot seek
redress” and urged the court to throw out the application for lack of
merit.
He said in his originating processes, the applicant had
“ridiculously and in contradiction of his claims” annexed a copy of his
notice of appeal signed personally by him.
“If the applicant feigns ignorance of the charge, how then was he
able to brief his counsel on the charge for an appeal to be filed.
“The issue leading to the preferring of a criminal charge against
the applicant borders on fraud in which billions of naira was lost by
the Federal government.”
He, therefore, urged the court to dismiss the application and award
“heavy” costs against the applicant for abusing the court’s process.
In response to the arguments of respondent’s counsels, Tompolo’s
lawyer, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, brought his application pursuant to the
provisions of the African Charter of Human rights, the 1999
constitution, as well as the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
He argued that in criminal law service of a charge was personal and
could not be presumed, adding that there is no evidence before the
court showing that exhibit A (charge) was served on the applicant.
On the issue of contempt, Adegboruwa submitted that the applicant
could not be cited for contempt, adding that since the beginning of the
proceedings, the applicant cannot be said to have breached any court
order.
He insisted that it was the constitutional right of the applicant
to apply to court for the enforcement of his rights and urged the court
to uphold it.
After listening to the submissions of counsel, Justice Olatoregun fixed June 19 for judgment.
The EFCC had filed a 40-count charge against Tompolo and nine others before Justice Ibrahim Buba of the same court.
Following the absence of Tompolo in court since his arraignment, Justice Buba had issued a bench warrant for his arrest and production in court.
The court had also on Feb. 19, 2014, ordered a forfeiture of property belonging to Tompolo after an application was moved to that effect by the EFCC.
Justice Buba had held that the Administration of Criminal Justice
Act 2015 empowers the court to seize properties of an accused who
refused to face trial.
The court recalled that though Tompolo refused to appear in court, he briefed his lawyers and through them sought to vacate the order of his arrest.
Consequently, he ordered forfeiture of properties belonging to Tompolo pending when appears in court.
Property affected by the forfeiture order included a River Crew Change Boat named MUHA – 15, the property known as “Tompolo Dockyard”, and the property known as “Tompolo Yard”, at the end of Chevron Clinic Road, next to Next Oil, Edjeba, Warri.
Others are the Diving School at Kurutie at Escravos River, the property known as “Tompolo House” at Oporaza Town, and any other property discovered by the EFCC moveable and immovable.
Meanwhile, Tompolo is seeking an order restraining the respondents from further proceeding with the charges slammed on him.
He insists that Sections 221 and 306 were in conflict with Section
36 of the Constitution which guarantees his right to fair hearing.
-NAN
No comments:
Post a Comment