Court to rule on continuing Emefiele’s case Feb 26

Justice Rahman Oshodi of a Lagos Special Offences Court has fixed February 26, 2025, to rule on whether to continue with the case of embattled former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, over alleged gratification.

The judge fixed the date after listening to arguments and submissions from counsel representing the parties in the suit.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had alleged that Emefiele accepted gratification and made corrupt demands while in office.

The anti-graft commission initially filed a 22-count charge against the embattled former CBN governor, Emefiele, and Henry Omoile.

Emefiele was arraigned on charges bordering on abuse of office, accepting gratification, and making corrupt demands while in office. Omoile faced three counts bordering on the unlawful acceptance of gifts by an agent.

They pleaded not guilty to all the charges, and the prosecution commenced the trial.

Sometime during the trial in January 2025, Justice Oshodi ruled on an application filed by Emefiele challenging the court’s jurisdiction.

Justice Oshodi delivered his ruling, striking out counts one to four, which bordered on abuse of office, and assuming jurisdiction over counts 8 to 22.

However, at the resumed proceedings yesterday, the prosecution team, led by Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), informed the court that the seventh prosecution witness (PW7), Adetola John, was present.

John told the court that he did not receive any complaints about the $400,000 he delivered as instructed during business hours.

Drama ensued as the defendant’s counsel, Mr. Olalekan Ojo (SAN), objected to the prosecution’s request to allow the witness to read documents the court had received for identification purposes.

Ojo argued that since the court had received the document for identification purposes, the witness should not be allowed to read or speak on it.

The document received by the court for identification purposes is a bundle of documents containing WhatsApp messages from one Eric, a personal assistant to Emefiele.

After Oyedepo (SAN) closed the evidence-in-chief of the seventh prosecution witness, the court asked the defense to cross-examine the witness.

However, Ojo (SAN) and Omoile’s counsel, Mr. Kazeem Gbadamosi (SAN), asked the court to recuse itself on allegations of bias.

“It is a matter of law under Section 221 of the Evidence Act. The court’s ruling allowing PW7 to testify has proven this, as the findings are totally prejudicial to the case,” Ojo argued.

The defense refused to cross-examine the witness and unanimously, through an oral application, asked the court to recuse itself on allegations of bias.

“A judge can either be consciously biased or unconsciously biased… At this stage, I urge the court to recuse itself and withdraw from this case,” Ojo added.

Oyedepo, in his response, vehemently opposed the defense’s application.

“In this proceeding, your lordship has ruled against the prosecution numerous times. If the defense is dissatisfied with the ruling of the court, they can appeal.

“I do not understand what the defense is trying to prove by asking this court to recuse itself because there is no evidence of bias in this case.

“This is a delay tactic, and I urge your lordship to dismiss this application. Any reasonable person in this court can see that this application is meant to stall the trial.

“The court had earlier granted an accelerated hearing in this case, and I urge this honorable court to ask the defense to cross-examine the witness.”

Oyedepo urged the court to hold that the defense had failed to sustain its allegation of bias. He cited ‘Adeogun Philip v. Gateway Portland Cement (2004) LPLR at page 54’, submitting that the defendant’s allegation should not be made orally but rather through an affidavit, which the prosecution would then respond to.

Ojo further argued, “We do not need to file any affidavit evidence. What we are relying on is already part of today’s record of proceedings. We are human, and it is proper under the circumstances… I rely on the cases of Azuokwuu Nwokanma & Anr (2005) LPELR and Egbewole v. Adeleke (2018) LPELR 44857.”

Justice Oshodi cautioned both counsels as their argument became heated. “You are all senior members of the Bar. I do not want either party to engage in personal attacks. I will deliver my ruling on February 26, 2025.”

Earlier in the proceedings, Ojo had informed the court of an application seeking leave to allow Emefiele to appeal the ruling delivered on January 8, 2025, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear his case.

Justice Oshodi subsequently adjourned the ruling to February 26, 2025.