The lawyer representing Waripamo-
Owei Dudafa, a former aide to ex-
president Goodluck Jonathan, on Friday
told a federal court that no government
agency had come forward to claim
ownership of the $15.5 million for
which his client is being prosecuted by
the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission.
Gboyega Oyewole said the former first
lady, Patience Jonathan, had continued
to lay claim to the money, even filing a
fundamental rights enforcement suit
before a court.
“Neither the Federal Government nor
any of its agencies; neither any state nor
its agencies have claimed the fund as
their own or that it was stolen from
them,” said Mr. Oyewole.
The money, which the EFCC had since
frozen in four Skye Bank accounts, was
opened in the name of the companies –
Pluto Property and Investment Company
Limited; Seagate Property Development
& Investment Co. Limited; Trans Ocean
Property and Investment Company
Limited and Avalon Global Property
Development Company Limited.
The companies were arraigned alongside
Mr. Dudafa, who served as Special
Adviser on Domestic Affairs to Mr.
Jonathan; Amajuoyi Briggs, a former
presidential aide; and Adedamola
Bolodeoku, a former Skye Bank official
for money laundering, stealing, forgery,
and conspiracy before Justice Babs
Kuewunmi of the Lagos Division of the
Federal High Court.
In a dramatic twist on the day of
arraignment, last month, all the
companies pleaded guilty to the 15-count
charge.
Messrs Dudafa, Briggs, and Bolodeoku
pleaded not guilty before the judge.
The judge had adjourned to September
27 for the EFCC to review the facts of the
case before he would determine the fate
of the companies.
But on the date, Mr. Oyewole and
Tochukwu Onyiuke, counsel to Mr.
Briggs, appeared in court with two
separate applications, urging the court to
change the plea of the four companies
from guilty to not guilty.
Mr. Oyewole said there was no
document before the court to prove that
the four people who had pleaded guilty
on behalf of the companies were
authorised to take the plea, adding that
they had in their statement to the EFCC
stated that they were neither directors of
the companies nor had anything to do
with the companies.
He also said in the face of Mrs.
Jonathan’s claim over the money,
allowing the guilty plea by the four
companies and convicting them of
money laundering charges would
amount to “a gross abuse of the judicial
process and an attack on the principle of
fairness and justice.”
Mr. Oyewole said his client was afraid
that the guilty plea entered by the four
companies would adversely affect him
since the proceedings were joint
proceedings and the first count bordered
on conspiracy.
On his own part, Mr. Onyiuke challenged
the jurisdiction and competence of the
judge to even entertain the arraignment
of the four companies in the first place.
“The condition precedent to this
honourable court assuming jurisdiction,
to wit: authority to represent the 4th to
7th defendants by their purported
representatives further to Section 477(3)
of the Administration of Criminal Justice
Act 2015, was completely lacking,” said
Mr. Onyiuke.
He said accepting the guilty plea of the
companies who admitted that they
conspired with his client to launder the
money would be a miscarriage of justice
against his client.
But the EFCC lawyer, Rotimi Oyedepo,
urged the court to throw out the two
applications, which he described as an
abuse of court processes.
He argued that it was too late for Mr.
Briggs to challenge the jurisdiction of the
court to entertain the charges after the
defendants had already submitted
themselves and had been arraigned.
He also pointed the attention of the court
to the statements of accounts from Skye
Bank where the $15.5 million was kept,
showing that those who took the plea on
the companies’ behalf were the
authorised persons with the mandate to
operate the accounts.
He said the accounts were opened
pursuant to documents from the
Corporate Affairs Commission where
they were registered as directors in the
companies.
“The prima facie evidence before Your
Lordship is that those who appeared
before Your Lordship are the directors
of the 4th to 7th defendants,” said Mr.
Oyedepo.
In his ruling on Friday, Justice Kuewumi
dismissed the applications brought by
Messrs Dudafa and Briggs, describing
them as an abuse of court process.
The judge noted that Mr. Dudafa had
already gone before the Court of Appeal
to challenge the guilty plea entered by
the four companies and, as a result, he
could no longer take a decision on the
issue.
“Once an issue is pending in the Court of
Appeal, it will be inappropriate for a
lower court to pronounce anything on
the same issue,” Mr. Kuewunmi said.
The instant application constitutes an
abuse of court process; same is hereby
dismissed.”
The judge adjourned till November 2,
2016 for the EFCC to open its case.

http://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/212318-no-nigerian-government-agency-said-patience-jonathan-stole-15-5-million-lawyer.html

Lol nobody indeed

None of them will cast their former boss who planted them there,,,,,,,,,

Because an alleged criminal in the case of theft was not caught red handed or someone has not come forth to claim ownership of a stolen items does not exonerate the accused who was found with an unquestionable items of culpability from prosecution.

The lawyer is simply talking about a matter of fact and not a matter of the law.

I have told many persons who have been shouting, prosecute Patience Jonathan that the case has no reasonable sense.

There's no office as the office of the First Lady of Nigeria in our constitution. It is just a glorified honor giving to the wife of the president. The First Lady of Nigeria is just like you and I. No provisions for her under the ambits of the constitution. No budgetary allocation to her unconstitutional office.

Most of the monies she gets her from honorarium, eye service, respectful and willful donations, inciting and back runs pay out, illegal levies and fundraisers.

Most of these we see as corrupt practice in the real sense, but no law court can throw her in jail. She can only go to jail if she's not remitting taxes for most of the monies she claims to have.

Lest we forget: She's not a public officer, neither is being a First Lady a civil service.

Confused Government

Was she working for FG? This case is only a waste of time

Is true sha. No one has said so.