Court fixes April 15 to hear applications in Ibeto’s case

Cletus Ibeto

Justice Oyindamola Ogala of a Lagos High Court, Ikeja, has fixed April 15, 2024, for hearing the applications filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against a businessman, Cletus Ibeto, over N4.8 billion alleged fraud.

The judge fixed the date as agreed by all parties in the suit to enable her to go through the various applications submitted by all parties and stay abreast of the case.

Ogala also directed counsel to both parties to file and exchange their responses to the application filed by the office of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) before the next date of adjournment. She said: “I want to read the case file and understand it in full. As agreed by all, I want all of us to respond and be on the same lane.”

At the resumed proceeding, the DPP, Dr Babajide Martins, announced his appearance on behalf of the Lagos State Attorney-General to take over the case.

The defence counsel, Ade Oshodi, informed the court of a notice of preliminary objection dated January 26, which has not been heard.


Oshodi also informed the court that the application, which was filed by former counsel to the defendant, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), be withdrawn as he had taken over the case and had filed a new application dated January 26, 2024.

He also said that Wole Olanipekun (SAN) was the one who appealed on the Bench warrant issued against the defendant by Justice Ismail Ijelu on November 3, 2023.

Earlier, the EFCC counsel, Rotimi Jacob (SAN), had informed the court that he was not served the hearing notice that the matter had been taken to another court and it was not a deliberate attempt not to appear before the court.

The court, however, said that there was an affidavit of proof of service on the prosecution. Jacob told the court that several lawyers that had represented the defendant raised the issue of territorial jurisdiction.

Responding to his submission, Martins said that from the point of law, the DPP acted on the directive of the attorney-general and that the prosecution had been served with the amicus brief filed by the office.

Author

Don't Miss