The prosecution in the alleged false assets declaration trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki has challenged him to defend himself against the charges pending against him.
Led by Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), the prosecution urged the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to reject a no-case submission made by Saraki and order him to enter defence in the case.
He said the prosecution hadled credible evidence through its witnesses.
Jacobs spoke in Abuja yesterday at the resumption of proceedings in Saraki’s trial before the CCT.
Saraki is being tried on a16-count charge of false assets declaration and other related offences.
Adopting the prosecution’s written response to Saraki’s written submission in support of his no-case submission, Jacobs argued that the prosecution has made out a “serious prima facie case against the defendant (Saraki)”.
He urged the tribunal to analyse and juxtapose the various asset declaration forms submitted by the defendant to reveal the falsehoods in them.
Jacobs said:”Our response to the no-case submission is dated June 2, 2017 and filed the same day.
“One method your lordship should adopt to show that there is serious prima facie case against the defendant is to look at Exhibits 6 and 26, which are assets declarations made by the defendant after the investigation of this case.
“My lordships will see that the defendant listed all the annexed properties and stated that they were acquired in 92 and 99 and, now.
“If my lord juxtaposes them with Exhibits 1 to 5, you will find that some of the properties he claimed acquired in 1999, 2002, and 2003, were not declared.”
Jacobs also contended that the defendant had “misconstrued” Paragraph 1, Schedule 5 of the Constitution, by claiming that a public officer was not under obligation to declare properties bought in companies’ names.
“To construe the constitution like that will defeat the essence of the CCT and the fight against corruption in Nigeria,” Jacobs said.
Jacobs also faulted Saraki’s contention that allegations contained in the petitions tendered by the prosecution as exhibits, do not relate to him.
Jacobs noted that Saraki’s name was mentioned in all the petitions.
He added: “In his (Saraki’s) address, he (Agabi) said the petitions had nothing to do with the defendant, although his name is mentioned.
“Prosecution does not depend on petition. Without a petition, a person can be prosecuted,” he said.
On the defence’s argument that non-disclosure does not constitute an offence, Jacobs argued that: “We have shown in paragraphs 4.25 to 4.27 that up till now, they (the defence) have not told the tribunal the ingredients of the offence. Failure to disclose an asset amounts to false declaration, which is an offence.”
On the defence contention that the prosecution failed to call certain witnesses, which it had listed, Jacobs said: “They said we ought to call 200 witnesses and they listed them. They brought it up as a new issue, and started re-adjusting their argument. This cannot be done.”
He added: “At this stage, care must be taken about what my lord can do. They were inviting your Lordship to give an opinion on the witnesses and evaluate their evidence.
“The Supreme Court has said your lordship cannot do that at this stage. At this stage, your lordship cannot express opinion on the evidence led until they defence give their own evidence.
“The Supreme Court warned that the ruling on a no-case submission must be kept brief. It is permitted to just say there is case to answer.
“The Supreme Court said where a lengthy ruling was delivered, an observation would be made on the facts and the prosecution would be right to appeal on the grounds that the judge is bias,” Jacobs said.
The lead defence lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN), while adopting the defence written submission, argued that the petitions, on which the charges were founded, have nothing to do with his client.
He further argued that the charges, particularly counts 1, 2, 6, 9,10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 disclosed no valid offences.
“There is inconsistency in the charges.I urge your lordship to hold that that is not an offence,” Agabi said.
He further argued that only an authorised person could declare the statement of a public officer to be false.
Agabi argued that the failure of the prosecution to disclose the name of the said authorised persons in the charge rendered it invalid.
He also said two of the witnesses called by the prosecution – Samuel Madojemu (an official of the Code of Conduct Bureau) and Michael Wetkas (an operative of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission) only gave hearsay testimony as evidence.
Agabi urged the tribunal to take note of the defence’s list of witnesses, containing names of more witnesses, but which it failed to call before closing its case.
He urged the tribunal to uphold his Saraki’s no-case submission and discharge him on the ground that the prosecution has failed to prove its case with credible evidence linking the defendant with the alleged offences.
The tribunal has reserved its ruling and will informed parties when it is ready for delivery. Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everyday
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com