We Re-Arrested Ofili-Ajumogobia To Prefer Fresh Charge Against Her – EFCC.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has
explained why it re-arrested a dismissed judge of the Federal High
Court, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.

A statement on Tuesday by its acting Head of Media and
Publicity, Tony Orilade, revealed that Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia was
re-arrested to enable the anti-graft agency to prefer a fresh
criminal charge against her.

It added that the arrest was in line with the decision of the
Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, in a case involving Justice
Hyeladzira Nganjiwa, where the court held that a judge could not be
prosecuted until he or she had either been dismissed or
compulsorily retired by the National Judicial Council (NJC).

The EFCC noted that consequent upon the fact that it had
presented Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia before the NJC for disciplinary
action and that the council had taken a position, it would approach
the court to prefer fresh charges against her.

Ofili-Ajumogobia and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Godwin
Obla, were first arraigned on a 30-count on November 28, 2016, on
offences bordering on alleged perversion of the course of justice,
graft, unlawful enrichment, providing false information and
forgery.

They were later re-arraigned on an amended 31-count bordering on
an alleged perversion of the course of justice, unlawful enrichment
and forgery.

According to the anti-graft agency, the judge and the lawyer had
pleaded not guilty to the charges preferred against them, thereby
setting the stage for the trial.

It revealed that it presented 12 witnesses and tendered several
documents that were admitted in evidence by the court in the course
of the trial.

The EFCC said counsel to Ofili-Ajumogobia who was the first
defendant, Robert Clarke, in an application dated November 27,
2018, said the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and urged
the court to discharge and acquit his client.

But counsel for the second defendant, Obla, Ifedayo Adedipe,
told the court on January 25, 2019, that the charges preferred
against his client could be entertained.

He, therefore, urged the court to separate the charges so that
his client could continue with his trial.

After listening to both parties, the EFCC quoted Justice Hakeem
Oshodi in his ruling as saying, “The issue of substantive
jurisdiction must be cleared before the issue of no-case submission
could be heard.”

The judge had further directed both parties to make their
submissions based on the application on the jurisdiction of the
court.

In his ruling at Tuesday’s sitting, Justice Oshodi stated that
based on the judicial precedent set by the case of Justice Nganjiwa
V. FRN, the High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the suit as the
EFCC “jumped the gun” in filing the first amended charge.

“As at Monday, December 11, 2017, the EFCC was aware of the
decision reached by the Court of Appeal in Nganjiwa vs FRN. As at
that date, the amended information was yet to be filed and the 12
prosecution witness was still giving evidence,” he was quoted as
saying by the EFCC.

The anti-graft agency stressed that in view of Tuesday’s ruling
by Justice Oshodi and having complied with the NJC procedure, it
would prefer fresh criminal charges against Justice
Ofili-Ajumogobia.