Judge says Maina’s lawyer threatened court; seeks to delay trial

A federal judge on Thursday accused lawyers representing the
former pension task force director, Abdulrasheed Maina, of
threatening the court in a bid to delay his trial.

Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja, said one of
the lawyers, Adeola Adedipe, had threatened the court by saying
that his expected ruling on Mr Maina’s health condition would be
challenged before the Court of Appeal.

Mr Maina is facing trial alongside his son, Faisal, for alleged
diversion of funds while he headed the pension task force.

The lawyers for Mr Maina and his son filed multiple applications
at the last court hearing, including one seeking his bail. The
lawyers also raised a motion saying Mr Maina had fallen ill.

When the case resumed Thursday, Mr Adedipe urged the court to
first resolve the applications on Mr Maina’s health and bail.

But in a response, Justice Abang said the issue of Mr Maina’s
health was not properly brought before him and that he would only
decide after making adequate findings.

He also added that the application for bail was yet to be
decided and that the court was still within time to make a
declaration.

“The court did not adjourn to make findings on the health report
of the defendant,” Mr Abang said.

Mr Abang then asked the defense lawyers if they were ready for
the trial, saying that his court had planned to proceed with the
trial on Thursday.

Responding, Mr Adedipe said the defense team was not ready for
trial because the issue of Mr Maina’s health condition and bail
were key matters that had not been resolved by the court.

He said a failure of the court to decide on the issues could
render the proceedings null and void in future hearings.

‘Nigerian Correctional Service helping to delay trial’

As he spoke, the lawyer said there was an emergency and
requested the court to adjourn briefly for Mr Maina to take his
medication. The court granted the request and after 20 minutes, Mr
Abang returned and asked the prosecution to respond to the
arguments by the defense.

The prosecution lawyer, Mohammed Abubakar, lamented the
arguments of the defense that Mr Maina’s bail and health conditions
were prerequisites to the continuation of the matter. He, however,
said he would “reluctantly” agree with the demand for an
adjournment.

In a ruling, Mr Abang accused Mr Maina’s lawyers of
“frustrating” proceedings and added that the defense team was in
cahoots with the officials of the Correctional Service to delay
proceedings.

“In the course of the proceedings today, the learned counsel for
the second defendant submitted that if the court fails to make
findings on the health status of the defendant, that the
proceedings of the court may be nullified at the Court of Appeal,”
the judge said. “It means he has threatened the court. The
submission of counsel is a threat to the court. It is unbecoming of
a counsel of his status.”

Mr Abang said the defendants have adopted the attitude of
threatening the court and added that his court was able to deal
with the threats.

“Counsel for the first defendant on October 30 did the same
thing to the court. Counsel is at liberty to make a submission and
not to threaten the court. This is unethical and contentious of the
court. Learned counsel for the second defendant, in his own
interest, should mind his words and avoid words that will put fear
in the mind of the court. This is because counsel is before me. I
have jurisdiction over him, I can deal with him summarily,” he
said.

Mr Abang described the remarks by Mr Adedipe as unnecessary and
added that the Nigerian Correctional Service was part of efforts to
frustrate the court’s proceedings.

“I know there is a Court of Appeal that is there to review my
decision. It is not the place of counsel to remind me. Not for
counsel to instill fear in the court. So any decision I will take,
I will be afraid that it will be set aside. Meanwhile, the counsel
did not place issues properly before the court,” he said.

“The Correctional Service has failed to comply with the order of
the court regarding the medical service. For 15 days they could not
provide a medical report. The Correctional Service is compounding
the issue before the court. I cannot infer on the health status of
the defendant. I’m not a medical doctor,” Mr Abang said.

“The proceedings of the court cannot be controlled by the
Correctional Service and the counsel, Mr Adedipe,” he added.

Mr Abang also said the court was not under obligation to
immediately comply with a request based on the provision of a
medical report.

“Even if the medical report was placed, it is speculative. The
medical report cannot automatically determine the suspension of the
matter,” Mr Abang said.

Regarding the decision of the prosecutor to accept the request
for adjournment, Mr Abang said it was immaterial that he agreed
reluctantly.

“The truth of the matter is that the prosecution has also
delayed proceedings in this matter today. The learned counsel for
the prosecution is in control of his brief. But there was no reason
to have consented to the application. A person can act in court,”
Mr Abang said. “The court will not tolerate any attempt to
frustrate proceedings in court again.”

The judge added that any of the parties that attempts to delay
the next hearing will be forced out while the case will continue in
their absence.

The case was adjourned to November 25 for daily trial.

Subscribe ToNairalaw News!