Respite came the way of the
erstwhile Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr Dimeji Bankole,
yesterday, as the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, discharged and
acquitted him over allegation that he used fake companies and defrauded the
federal government to the tune of N894 million while he was in office.
While upholding a
no-case-application that was filed before the court by the former Speaker,
Justice Evoh Chukwu, held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission,
EFCC, failed to establish a prima-facie criminal case against the accused
person.
Consequently, Justice Chukwu,
quashed the entire 16-count charge against the ex-Speaker, saying he was
satisfied that the accused person has no case to answer with respect to the
charge.
According to the Judge, “The
prosecution failed to prove that the accused person acted with the intent to
defraud. There is no evidence that the accused unilaterally or in conjunction
with anybody inflated prices of contracts. Evidence of the prosecution never
showed that the accused entered into agreement with either the supplier or
contractors.
“There is no justification for the
continuation of this trial, the prosecution failed to disclose a prima-facie
case to warrant the court to demand explanations from the accused person. There
is no nexus connecting the accused with the alleged offence.
“Besides, none of the witnesses
linked the accused with the award of the alleged contracts or showed that he
entered into collusive agreement with anybody with regard to the offence
contained in the charge.
“From the preponderance of evidence
before the court, there is an agreement that the accused does not know any of
the companies or any of the contractors. Prosecution witnesses testified
that contracts within the upper-limit were only approved by principal
officers of the House of the Representatives.
“The question the prosecution has
failed to provide answer to remains, at the end of the contract, did the
accused person enjoy any personal benefit? There was nothing in evidence so
far laid that will require any further explanation by the accused.
There is no evidence that he acted in breach of the Public Procurement Act.
“There is nothing to show that he
selected or superintended over the bidding process, nothing to show that
he is a signatory to the account or any of the companies that got the contract.
“What explanation does the court
then require the accused to give based on evidence adduced by both the
prosecution and the witnesses?
“It is my considered view that the
prosecution has not disclosed any corrupt, unlawful influence, bribery or
corruption by the accused in the award of the contracts.
“Section 35(6) of the 1999
Constitution placed the onus on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the
accused person who by law is presumed innocent until otherwise proved.
“The no-case submission succeeds,
accordingly, the accused is hereby discharged and acquitted,” the trial Judge
held.
Specifically, Bankole who was on 11
November 2013, re-arraigned before the court on an amended 16-count charge
preferred against him by the EFCC, had through his counsel Chief O.Akoni, SAN,
maintained that the anti-graft body failed to establish his complicity in the
alleged contract fraud.
Contending that he neither approved
nor supervised the execution of the said contracts, the former Speaker,
insisted that in the absence of evidence, there was no basis to allow him to
pass through the rigours of trial.
Basically, EFCC, alleged that
Bankole rigged bid for the purchase of 3 units of Mercedes Benz S-600 cars, 2
units of Range Rover vehicles (without bullet proofs) and 400 units of DSTV
systems, by refusing to follow all the procedures prescribed for public
procurements in Sections 17 to 56 of the Public Procurement Act No.14 of 2007,
leading to a loss of value to the national treasury and thereby committed an
offence contrary to Section 58(4)(e) of the Public Procurement Act, No.14 of
2007 and punishable under Section 58(5) of the same Act.
It told the court that some of the
alleged deals that formed the conduit pipes through which monies were pilfered
by the accused person, included the purchase of 400 units of 40-inch Samsung
(LNS. 341) television sets, 800 units of Desktop Computers (HP Compaq dc 5700),
100 units of Sharp Digital Copier 5316, 400 units of HP LaserJet 2600N, among
others.
To prove the complicity of the
accused person, EFCC, called six witnesses and tendered several evidences it
urged the court to rely upon and convict the ex-Speaker.
Among those that testified included
the Clerk of the House, Mr Mohammed Sani Omololu, investigative officers of the
EFCC and BPE officials.
Some of the witnesses had narrated
how bulk of the contract sum was lodged into an account maintained in the
Kaduna branch of Zenith Bank by a company, Multigate Resources Services
Limited, whose address could not be traced by EFCC.
The lead Investigator, Mr. Ibrahim
Ahmed, told the court that whereas the contract funds were released via Cheques
in the name of different companies, the monies ended up in the same Zenith Bank
account in Kaduna.
The witness, who testified as Pw-1,
insisted that spirited efforts by EFCC to trace the locations of the companies
were futile as the addresses found on the contract award documents purported to
belong to the companies, were non-existent.
He said the investigation was
prompted by a petition that was lodged before the anti-graft agency by
Bankole’s colleagues in the House of Reps, led by Mr Dino Melaye.
Ahmed said, “We wrote to the banks
and requested for the statements of the accounts. We analysed them and
discovered that the cheques were cleared with one account called Multigate
Resources Limited with Zenith Bank, domiciled in Kaduna.
”We also collected the account
opening packages and we discovered that it had the same address with the
company we could not locate.”
Source: Vanguard
No comments:
Post a Comment