Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, sitting at the Federal High Court in Ikoyi Lagos, denied a request by EFCC to issue an arrest warrant for Dr Oba Otudeko, Dr Bisi Onasanya and others due to lack of formal service on the defendants.
The court addressed multiple motions during the session,
including the Prosecutor’s request for a warrant of arrest, which the Judge
rejected due to the lack of formal service to the defendants. The Judge granted
an application for substituted service. The case has been adjourned to 13th
February for arraignment.
Additionally, Bode Olanipekun appearing for Dr Otudeko
sought an order restraining parties from irresponsible use of the media and the
judge advised all parties to exercise restraint in media engagement and urged
journalists present to ensure accurate reporting of court proceedings.
The case has brought the EFCC under scrutiny for allegedly flouting procedural norms. Critics have faulted the agency for going public with the charges without first formally serving Otudeko and other implicated parties. Legal experts argue that this approach undermines the principle of fair hearing and could prejudice the public against the accused.
One lawyer, who spoke under the condition of anonymity,
said: “The EFCC’s conduct flies in the face of Section 36(5) of the
Constitution, which guarantees the presumption of innocence until proven
guilty. Even more troubling is their disregard for Order 3, Rule 8 of the
Federal High Court (Criminal Procedure) Rules, 2024, which clearly states that
charges must be formally served before any public disclosures are made.”
The lawyer added that this procedural breach has subjected
Otudeko and others to trial by media, creating unnecessary public distrust.
Observers have noted that the revival of a 12-year-old
matter, which had been previously investigated by the EFCC, appears to coincide
with the recent EGM request and ongoing tussle over shareholding control at FBN
Holdings. This development has raised eyebrows, with many suggesting it could
be an attempt to influence or gain leverage in the contentious ownership
dispute surrounding the financial institution.
They have also noted the potential reputational damage
inflicted on Dr Otudeko and others involved. The EFCC’s actions, they claim,
have placed these individuals in the court of public opinion, raising questions
about the impartiality of the forthcoming judicial process.
A legal expert noted, “These kinds of reckless actions by
law enforcement agencies do more harm than good. They erode public trust in the
system and unfairly tarnish the reputation of individuals involved.”
Dr Otudeko has categorically denied allegations levelled
against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) which centre
around his involvement with First Bank of Nigeria, where he served as a
non-executive director and left about 4 years ago. In a release, Dr Otudeko
stated he is confident that the truth will prevail in due course and looks
forward to addressing these claims in the appropriate forum . Dr Onasanya, while
stating that he has no interest in the control dispute at First Bank, also
asserted about his record at First Bank that his “stellar reputation of
integrity, built over four decades of impeccable professional service, cannot
and will not be tarnished by these false allegations and incorrect charges”.
The case has been adjourned to 13th February.
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