Court refuses to free Akingbola of N47bn theft charges
Erastus Akingbola
A
Lagos High Court in Ikeja on Friday dismissed an application by a former
Managing Director of the defunct Intercontinental Bank Plc, Mr. Erastus
Akingbola, seeking to quash the charges of stealing N47bn preferred against him
by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
The
EFCC is prosecuting Akingbola along with his business associate, Mr. Bayo Dada.
Both were accused of defrauding the bank (now Access Bank Plc) and stealing its
money in 2009 while Akingbola was its Managing Director.
In
a ruling, Justice Lateef Lawal-Akapo dismissed the two separate applications
filed by Akingbola and Dada, seeking to quash the 22 counts preferred against
them for lack of jurisdiction.
“I
find no merit in the applications and they are accordingly dismissed,” the
judge ruled.
Akingbola’s
counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), had argued that the state High Court
lacked jurisdiction to hear the charges because they were capital market and
banking related.
Like
Olanipekun, Dada’s counsel, Prof. Taiwo Osipitan (SAN), had also maintained
that only the Federal High Court had exclusive jurisdiction on the charges.
“This
matter is advance fee fraud in form but capital market in substance,” Osipitan
had said.
But
the judge dismissed the lawyers’ contentions.
“Clearly,
none of the charges are related to banking transactions. These are charges of
stealing, receiving stolen property and advance fee fraud,” the judge held.
The
court also distinguished the matter from the one in which the Court of Appeal
quashed the charges instituted against a former Managing Director of Finbank
Plc, Mr. Okey Nwosu, before another judge of the Lagos High Court, Ikeja.
Justice
Lawal-Akapo said, “The offences canvassed in Okey Nwosu case had their roots in
capital market. In the present case, the offences charged are stealing,
receiving stolen property and advance fee fraud.
“Thus,
I hold are the charges are within the confine of the state High Court.”
The
judge also dismissed the allegation by Olanipekun that the charges instituted
against his client amounted to double jeopardy and abuse of court process as
similar charges had been instituted against him (Akingbola) at the Federal High
Court, Lagos.
But
the judge held that the defence failed to substantiate the allegation as it
failed to produce the charges filed at the Federal High Court to assist the
court in drawing it’s conclusion.
“I
hereby presume that the failure of counsel to produce the charges and proof of
evidence in the charge number FHC/L/CS/4436/2009 is that if they are produced
they will be unfavourable tot the case of the applicant and I so hold,” the
judge held.
He
agreed with the prosecuting counsel, Chief Godwin Obla (SAN), that section
251(3) of the Constitution had preserved the power of the court to try the
defendant for the charges.
Comments
Post a Comment