***Assumes jurisdiction to try ex-CBN Gov, strikes out 4-count charge of unknown law against him
Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos Special Offences Court has struck out four out of the 26-count charge against former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele , in connection with allegations of abuse of office.
Emefiele had through his lawyer, Mr Olalekan Ojo (SAN), challenged the court’s jurisdiction over some of the charges, claiming that he could not be tried in any state high court for alleged offences brought by the prosecuting Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The EFCC had filed a 26-count charge against Emefiele, following his alleged involvement in misuse of office, leading to a loss of $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion.
Emefiele’s co-defendant, Henry Omoile, is also facing trial for related offences, including the unlawful acceptance of gifts.
In his application, Emefiele argued that some of the 26 charges, particularly Counts 1-4, were unconstitutional, as they lacked legal foundation.
The ex-CBN Governor also urged the court to strike out the said four-count charge on the grounds that the alleged offences occurred outside its jurisdiction.
In his verdict on Emefiele’s application, Justice Oshodi held that the allocation of foreign exchange without bidding, the subject of Counts 1-4, was not punishable under the law.
The judge further held that “Allocation of foreign exchange without reason is not defined as an offence in any written law,” and therefore, the objection to these counts succeeded while the judge struck them out.
But the court upheld its territorial jurisdiction over Counts 8-26 and dismissed Emefiele’s objection.
The judge also held that he has jurisdiction to try Emefiele on the other charges, citing relevant statutory and constitutional provisions.
Justice Oshodi further affirmed that the EFCC had established sufficient territorial nexus for these charges, saying that it is imperative to allow the trial to proceed.
The judge said, “Allocation of foreign exchange without reason is not defined as an offence in any written law.
“The objection to counts one to four succeeds and is hereby struck out.
“The objection challenging the court’s territorial jurisdiction over count eight to 26 fails and is hereby dismissed.
“The prosecution has established sufficient territorial nexus in this case.”
The EFCC had initially arraigned Emefiele on 26-count charge related to alleged misuse of his office, resulting in a loss of $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion.
But Olalekan Ojo (SAN), Emefiele’s lawyer, argued that the court in Lagos lacked jurisdiction, stating that the offences, including abuse of office, occurred outside its territorial reach.
He contended that the charges violated Section 36(12) of the Nigerian Constitution and emphasized that the Lagos State House of Assembly did not have legislative authority over matters on the Exclusive Legislative List.
Ojo argued that the territorial jurisdiction of a court was confined to the geographical area in which it operates, and since the alleged offences occurred outside this area, the court could not hear the case.
But the prosecuting EFCC’s lawyer, Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), countered the argument of Ojo, insisting that the alleged crimes were economic in nature, falling within the EFCC’s jurisdiction.
Oyedepo further argued that substantial evidence supported Lagos as the appropriate venue for the trial, pointing to witness testimonies and factual evidence establishing the court’s jurisdiction.
Delivering his ruling on the matter, Justice Oshodi held that the EFCC had proven its territorial jurisdiction over Counts 8-26 and dismissed Emefiele’s application challenging the jurisdiction of the court.
The judge further held that the EFCC had established a territorial jurisdictions on count eight to 26 with various facts in the proof of evidence attached with the case file before the court.
Justice Oshodi later adjourned the matter and fixed trial dates for February 24 and 26, 2025.
