A federal high court in Abuja has cautioned defence lawyers against delaying the trial of four men accused of kidnapping and killing an officer of the Department of State Services (DSS).
Joyce Abdulmalik, the presiding judge, issued the warning on
Wednesday after Kelvin Ekwe and Geoffrey Uwadiegwu, counsel for the defendants,
sought an adjournment.
The defendants, Michael Okafor, also known as Onyechimeleze;
Chinedu Chukwudozie, alias Kante; Chibunna Olisa; and Chigozie Olisa, also
known as Ability, were arraigned on September 28 on a six-count charge
bordering on terrorism and kidnapping. They pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution alleged that the defendants conspired to
commit acts of terrorism and abducted Ekpeyong Owoh, a DSS operative, while he
was travelling from Port Harcourt, Rivers state, to Awka, Anambra state. They
were also accused of holding him hostage and killing him.
The prosecution further alleged that the defendants belonged
to the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and its armed wing, the
Eastern Security Network (ESN), and unlawfully possessed firearms, including an
AK-47 rifle and a pump-action gun.
At Wednesday’s proceedings, Munirat Oladunjoye, counsel for
the prosecution, asked the court for permission to conceal the identities of
its witnesses under section 232(3)(b) of the Administration of Criminal Justice
Act (ACJA), 2015.
However, Ekwe opposed the request, arguing that the
prosecution had not shown how revealing the witnesses’ identities would
prejudice its case.
He also said the application should be formally filed to
allow the defence to respond and avoid being taken by surprise.
When the judge asked the defence counsel to cite a legal
provision requiring a formal application, Ekwe relied on section 36 of the 1999
Constitution.
Oladunjoye countered his argument, and the judge ruled in
favour of the prosecution, holding that revealing the witnesses’ identities in
a terrorism case would not serve the interest of justice.
She ordered that the witness be identified by the code name
“AB” and warned that anyone who contravened section 232(5) of the ACJA would be
liable to a one-year jail term.
The proceedings later stalled after Uwadiegwu told the court
he had only just taken over the case and needed more time to study the file.
Ekwe also said he had only recently received video evidence
from the prosecution and was not prepared to proceed with the trial.
Oladunjoye, however, told the court that the video would not
be used during Wednesday’s proceedings. She also argued that Ekwe’s absence on
October 6 had contributed to an earlier adjournment and urged the court to
proceed.
As both defence lawyers rose to address the court over the
request for an adjournment, the judge cautioned them against unruly conduct.
“I run my court in line with international best practice,
and that is why people say I am strict,” the judge said.
“So, when I run my court, there should be 99.9 percent
compliant according to international best practice.”
Abdulmalik said she would ordinarily not have listed the
case for hearing because of the pre-election matters before the court.
The judge said she had at least nine judgements to write in
pre-election cases, which must be delivered before November 9, but considered
the terrorism case important enough to warrant an expedited trial.
The judge granted a short adjournment but warned the defence
against further delays.
“This adjournment is at the instance of the two defence
counsel,” she said, adjourning the case until October 28 for the commencement
of trial.
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