Failure buy a defence witness to provide complete documents on
Wednesday stalled the forgery trial of John Abebe, younger brother
of former First Lady, the late Mrs. Stella Obasanjo.
Abebe is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission (EFCC) before an Ikeja Special Offences Court.
The trial could not proceed after defence counsel, Ms
Oritsematosan Nabuyaka, Head, Registry Department, Corporate
Affairs Commission (CAC), produced an incomplete set of documents
necessary for Abebe’s defence.
Explaining why the documents were incomplete, Nabuyaka, a
subpoenaed witness, told the court that the documents were the only
ones that could be produced due to insufficient time.
Nabuyaka who was led in evidence by defence counsel, Uche
Nwokedi (SAN), said she brought before the court certificate of
incorporation of BP Nig. Ltd. and certificate of incorporation of
Statoil Nig. Ltd.
According to her, the other documents are Ccertificate of Change
of Name of Statoil to Equinox Nig. Ltd., Memorandum and Articles of
Association of BP Nig. Ltd. and Form C07 of BP Nigeria Exploration
Ltd.
“This was what was transmitted to me from the head office. By
the time the head office was able to transmit page eight, we did
not have ample time,” the CAC Assistant Director said.
Counsel to the EFCC, Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo, in his reaction,
expressed displeasure at the development.
“The last witness came from the same establishment (CAC). He
said he had seen the subpoena and that they needed ample time to
produce the documents.
“It was with that same subpoena that the first defence witness,
who is from a different establishment, appeared in court to give
evidence.
“Your lordship graciously gave us today and tomorrow for this
trial.
“In order not to waste today and tomorrow, we should deal with
this witness today as she is not here in her private or personal
capacity,” Oyedepo said.
Justice Mojisola Dada thereafter adjourned the case until August
15 for continuation of trial.
Abebe had on July 26, 2018, pleaded not guilty to a four-count
charge of forgery, fabricating evidence, using fabricated evidence
and attempt to pervert the cause of justice.
The defendant, according to the EFCC, committed the offences on
June 22, 2010, in Lagos.
“Abebe knowingly forged BP Exploration Nig. Ltd. letter dated
Nov. 30,1995, to Inducon (Nig.) Ltd.
“He committed the forgery by inserting in page two of the said
letter, the following words: ‘Also note that the ‘Buy-Out Option’
only applies to the pre-production stage of the Net Profit Interest
Agreement (NPIA). The $4 million buy-out is thus irrelevant from
production of oil in any of our fields.
“He purported same to have been issued by BP Exploration Nig.
Ltd.,” Oyedepo said.
The prosecution claims that the defendant used the allegedly
forged letter as evidence in suit No. FHC/L/CS/224/2010 between
Abebe, Inducon Nig. Ltd. and Statoil Nig. Ltd. in a Federal High
Court.
The evidence was admitted in evidence in the suit, according to
the EFCC.
According to the Commission, the defendant attempted to pervert
the course of justice through the actions.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), reports that the alleged
offences violate Sections 120(1), 120(2), 126(2) of the Criminal
Code Law of 2003.
Subscribe ToNairalaw News!
Read more alleged-forgery-incomplete-documents-stalls-trial-of-stella-obasanjos-brother/
NCS customs operations lagos
Court Awards N5.5b damages against Nigerian Customs over
unlawful seizure of rice consignment
A Federal High Court in Abuja has awarded damages amounting to
over N5.5billion against the Nigerian Customs Service (NCS) and the
Chairman, Nigerian Customs Service Board (NCSB) over their unlawful
seizure of 90 containers of rice imported by a firm, Maggpiy
Trading TFZE.
Maggpiy stated in its suit, marked:FHC/CA/CS/40/2017 that, on
March 18, 2017, officials of the NCS invaded and sealed up its
warehouse in the Tinapa Free Trade Zone (TFTZ), Calabar, containing
over 90containers of rice stored in air-tight containers.
The plaintiff said, in addition to sealing its warehouse with
its content, officials of the NCS stole part of the seized rice and
detained its 40 trucks, containing 317 transit containers of rice,
destined for the Tinapa Free Trade Zone, without lawful
justification for 120 days along Onne, Port-Harcourt road.
In a judgment on Wednesday, Justice Inyang Ekwo upheld the
plaintiff’s claims and held that the 1stand 2nd respondents – NCS
and the Chairman, NCSB – acted unlawfully and without any
justification in law.
Justice Ekwo rejected the defence raised by the NCS and the
Chairman, NCSB and their attempt to justify their actions.
The judge faulted the 1st and 2nd defendants’ claim that they
acted under the Federal Ministry of Finance Import Guidelines,
Procedures and Documentation Requirements under the Destination
Inspection Scheme in Nigeria.
Justice Ekwo held that, not only was the document inadmissible
and worthless, having not been signed; there was no provision in
the document that made it applicable to Free Trade Zones.
“I have studied the document, I cannot find anywhere it is made
applicable to Free Trade Zones, which both parties have agreed, is
a country within a country.”
The judge also rejected some circular tendered by the Customs to
justify their action.
Justice Ekwo held that not only were most of the circulars made
after the plaintiff’s rice consignment was seized on March 18,
2017, the defendants failed to show the law and orders pursuant to
which the circulars were issued.
“The circular made on March 30, 2017, declaring Free Trade
Zones, as land borders cannot apply to this case because it does,
not have a retrospective effect.
“Therefore, the circulars, made after the plaintiff had imported
the rice, and relied upon by the 1st and 2nd defendants, do not
apply to this case,” the judge said.
Justice Ekwo also faulted the 1st and 2nd defendant’s argument
that they were exempted, under the Customs and Excise Management
Act, the from any liability and prosecution while applying the
provisions of the law.
The judge said such exemption only applies where officials of
the NCS are exercising the power granted by the law – the Customs
and Excise Management Act.
He added: “It has not been shown to this court the provisions of
the said Act that authorises any of the Customs officials to enter
and seal a business premises in a Free Trade Zone
“In that case, the foray of the 1st and 2nd defendants into the
territory of the Tinapa Free Trade Zone and Resort, which is not a
territory of the 1st and 2nd defendants, and which was not to
enforce the provisions of the Nigerian Export Processing Zone Act
or any regulation there of,was illegal and unlawful.
“The argument by the 1st and 2nd defendants that the plaintiff
was importing its rice through the land border was questionable,
because the containers they seized were merely being transported on
land, from Onne Sea Port to the Tinapa Free Trade Zoneand
Resort.
“The containers were therefore, in transit between one sea port
and another. And, being in transit cannot be interpreted as land
border importation.”
The judge described as infantile the argument that the plaintiff,
in importing rice, acted outside its operating licence which was
for the plaintiff to trade in food and beverages in Tinapa Free
Trade Zone.
Justice Ekwo noted that such an argument amounted to a futile
attempt to distinguish between rice and food.
The judge frowned at the discovery that part of the seized
consignment was stolen by officials of the Nigerian Customs, while
the plaintiff’s warehouse was sealed by the 1sstand 2nd
defendants.
He said: “another intriguing part of the defendants action,
during the course of this proceedings, is the discovery that, when
stocks were taken, upon the unsealing of the warehouse by the 1st
and 2nd defendants, 19421 of 50 kg bags and 1639 of 25 kg of the
seized rice consignment have been pilfered by officers of the 1st
and 2nd defendants.
“The 1st and 2nd defendants proferred no defence on this issue nor
countered the evidence of the plaintiff.
“This, in my opinion, is a brazen act of treating the
proceedings before the court with contempt apart from the
reprehensible theft that the act of the 1st and 2nd defendants
represents.”
The judge further held that the1st and 2nd defendants failed to
supply evidence in support of their allegation that the plaintiff
was involved in the smuggling of rice.
He added that smuggling being a criminal offence, the1st and 2nd
defendant ought to provide evidence of prosecution or conviction of
the plaintiff for the alleged offence of smuggling.
Justice Ekwo also frowned at the 1stand 2nd defendants’ failure to
obey two different interlocutory orders of the court,which were
intended to mitigate the loss which the plaintiff eventually
suffered as a result of the theft of part of the seized goods and
contermination from prolong sealing of the warehouse.
The judge granted all the reliefs by the plaintiff and awarded
specific and general in damages in favour of the plaintiff, and
against the 1st and 2nd defendants, in the amount estimated at
N3,805,638,950 and $4,796,550.
Justice Ekwo also granted an order of perpetual injunction
restraining the defendants from further unlawfully interfering with
the lawful business transactions of the plaintiff within the Tinapa
Free Trade Zone.
He also said the judgements um shall attract interest “at the
prevailing Monetary Policy Rate of the Central Bank from the date
of judgment until judgment sum is fully paid.”
Although the National Security Adviser (NSA) was sued as the 3rd
defendant, Justice Ekwo said the plaintiff made out no case against
the 3rd defendant.
By PRNigeria