Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court in Ikeja, on Wednesday, dismissed an application filed by the former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to try him over alleged abuse of office.
Justice Oshodi, while ruling on the application, held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has established that the court has the territorial jurisdiction to determine counts eight to 20 on their merit.
The judge, however, struck out counts one to four on the ground that the offences described in those counts were unknown to law.
The former CBN boss was arraigned before the court by the EFCC alongside one Herry Omoile on allegations of accepting gratification, gifts through agents, corruption, and fraudulent property receipts.
The anti-graft agency also accused the 1st defendant of conferring corrupt advantage on his associates contrary to the Corrupt Practices Act 2000.
The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge.
Emefiele had argued through his lawyer, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), that he can not be tried in any State High Court in Nigeria for alleged abuse of office, as this raises significant constitutional and legal issues.
The senior lawyer also maintained that the court does not have jurisdiction to try the offence of abuse of office related to the defendant’s position as Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria at the time of the alleged crimes.
However, in its opposition to the application, the anti-graft agency, through its lawyer, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), stated that the allegations against Emefiele are economic and financial crimes, which the EFCC is statutorily empowered to investigate and prosecute before the court.
Oyedepo also submitted that the proper venue wherein the defendants can be tried for the alleged offences is Lagos State, wherein all the ingredients of the alleged offences took place.
In his ruling, Justice Oshodi held that while counts one to four pertain to the general offence of abuse of office as defined by criminal law, the specific actions alleged in the counts—namely, the allocation of foreign exchange without a bid—are not defined as an offence in any written law. As a result, the court struck out the charges.
But, on counts eight to 26, the judge held that by applying established legal principles, the evidence presented was sufficient to affirm the court’s territorial jurisdiction.
He pointed out that his decision was strictly limited to the jurisdictional objection and does not speak to the merits of the allegations against Emefiele.
Justice Rahman Oshodi subsequently ruled that the objection challenging the court’s territorial jurisdiction over counts eight to 26 failed and was thus dismissed.
The matter was later adjourned until February 24 and 26 for the continuation of the trial.
