Court Questions EFCC Over Poor Prosecution Of Corruption Cases

Justice Mojisola Dada of a Special Offences Court in Ikeja has
questioned the integrity of the Economic and Financial Crime
Commission (EFCC) in the fight against corruption following a poor
prosecution of cases.

The judge raised the concern during the trial of a former
Executive Director of the Punch Newspaper, Azubike Ishekwene, and
Olalekan Abdul.

The duo is being tried on an amended 15-count charge bordering
on forgery, conspiracy to forge, using false documents, making
documents without authority and obtaining money by false
pretence.

During the trial, Justice Dada queried the EFCC counsel, Mr
Idris Mohammed, over the prosecution of the case and noted the
agency’s lack of diligent prosecution of corruption cases.

The judge noted that when she looked at an exhibit (a bank
statement of account from 2010 to 2019) which was presented by the
EFCC, she discovered that records from 2010 to 2012 were
missing.

She recalled instances where there were disparities in the
information in the charge sheet and confessional statements of
defendants being prosecuted by the EFCC.

The judge also pointed out that in a plea bargain agreement the
EFCC had brought before her the previous day, the information in
the charge stated an alleged fraud of 2700 USD while the
defendant’s confessional statement indicated fraud of 10,700
USD.

Justice Mojisola Dada of a Special Offences Court in Ikeja has
questioned the integrity of the Economic and Financial Crime
Commission (EFCC) in the fight against corruption following a poor
prosecution of cases.

The judge raised the concern during the trial of a former
Executive Director of the Punch Newspaper, Azubike Ishekwene, and
Olalekan Abdul.

The duo is being tried on an amended 15-count charge bordering
on forgery, conspiracy to forge, using false documents, making
documents without authority and obtaining money by false
pretence.

During the trial, Justice Dada queried the EFCC counsel, Mr
Idris Mohammed, over the prosecution of the case and noted the
agency’s lack of diligent prosecution of corruption cases.

The judge noted that when she looked at an exhibit (a bank
statement of account from 2010 to 2019) which was presented by the
EFCC, she discovered that records from 2010 to 2012 were
missing.

She recalled instances where there were disparities in the
information in the charge sheet and confessional statements of
defendants being prosecuted by the EFCC.

The judge also pointed out that in a plea bargain agreement the
EFCC had brought before her the previous day, the information in
the charge stated an alleged fraud of 2700 USD while the
defendant’s confessional statement indicated fraud of 10,700
USD.