Controversial cross-dresser and socialite, Idris Olanrewaju Okuneye, popularly known as Bobrisky, has filed a Notice of Appeal before the Court of Appeal in Lagos, challenging the legality his conviction on a four-count charge of Naira abuse.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had brought Bobrisky to court on four counts bordering on naira abuse while Justice A.O. Awogboro of the Federal High Court, Lagos had on 12 April, sentenced him to six months imprisonment without an option of fine.
But the lawyer to Bobrisky, , Bimbo Kusanu, on Monday, filed a notice of appeal, asking the appellate court to set aside the maximum sentence.
Kusanu is asking the court to replace the sentence with an option of a N50,000 fine on each of the counts.
Kusanu also argued in the notice of appeal that the trial court imposed the maximum sentence on Bobrisky who had no previous criminal record of conviction.
He stated that there were options to impose a lesser sentence by the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA).
He averred that the sentence imposed by the trial court against the appellant was punitive and contrary to the mandatory provisions of the ACJA.
The appellant stated that the trial court did not consider the positive antecedent of the appellant, who did not waste the time of the court by pleading guilty to the charge.
He further argued that Bobrisky honoured the invitation of the EFCC on the first invitation, saying that the court failed to exercise its discretion judiciously and judicially in sentencing the appellant.
He explained that such an act had occasioned a miscarriage of justice against his client.
The Notice of Appeal reads in part, “The sentence of the Lower Court that imposed maximum penalty of six-months imprisonment without option of fine on the Appellant (Bobrisky) who is a first time convict without previous record of criminal conviction.
“The Learned trial Judge erred in Law and in facts by his imposition of the maximum sentence of 6 Months imprisonment terms against the Appellant without option of fine contrary to the provisions of Section 416(2) d of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act of 2015 (“ACJA”) that prescribed the mandatory guidelines on the trial Court on imposition of sentencing after criminal conviction of a first time offender as the Appellant.
“The trial Court imposed the maximum sentence on the Appellant who has no previous record criminal of conviction when there are options to impose a lesser sentence by the provisions of the ACJA.
“The Sentence imposed by the trial Court against the Appellant is punitive contrary to the mandatory provisions of the Law (ACJA) on sentencing.
“The Appellant has suffered miscarriage of Justice by the maximum sentence imposed by the learned trial Court.
“The reasons adduced by the learned trial Court for the imposition of maximum punishment on the Appellant which is essentially on what foreigners think of abuse of Naira, is perverse and is out of tune with the reality of what the trial Court should have been considered to impose maximum punishment on the Appellant.
“The intendment of the provisions of the Central Bank Act 2007 that the Appellant was charged with is for Nigerians not to tamper with Naira and not what nationals of foreign countries view about tampering with Naira.
“The trial Court did not consider the positive antecedent of the Appellant who did not waste the precious Judicial resources of the trial Court when he pleaded guilty to the Charge.
“The Appellant honoured the invitation of the Respondent-Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on the first invitation during the investigation leading to the charge”.
“The trial Court failed to exercise his discretion judiciously and judicially in sentencing the Appellant, which has occasioned miscarriage of justice against the Appellant.”
