As speculations mount about last week’s withdrawal of the charges against former minister of Niger Delta Affairs, Elder Godson Orubebe by the federal government, indication has emerged that the decision may have been taken based on legal advice from the Ministry of Justice.
According to sources close to the government, the advice from the Federal Ministry of Justice indicated that the case against Orubebe, as constructed and filed, was fundamentally defective.
Orubebe, who served in the Goodluck Jonathan administration, was arraigned by the Federal Government at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) last year on allegations of false declaration of assets.
Sources also confirmed that the legal advice stated that since Orubebe was not invited to make a statement on the allegations against him, the process of arraignment was fundamentally flawed.
It was also gathered that the legal advice cited Section 379 sub-section (1) (a) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which listed the ingredients that must be forwarded as part of the process to be fulfilled by the prosecution before the commencement of the case, as including in (iv) “copies of statements of the defendant.”
Other documents mentioned by the section are the proof of evidence, consisting of the list of witnesses, the list of exhibits to be tendered, summary of statements of the witnesses, and copies of the statement of the defendant.
The attachments required also include: Any other document, report, or material that the prosecution intends to use in support of its case at the trial; particulars of bail or any recognisance, bond or cash deposit, if defendant is on bail; particulars of place of custody, where the defendant is in custody; particulars of any plea bargain arranged with the defendant; particulars of any previous interlocutory proceedings, including remand proceedings, in respect of the charge, and any other relevant document as may be directed by the court.
Also to be submitted is a copy of the form for information on legal representation as provided under section 376 (9) of the Act.
It was also revealed that the ministry further submitted in its advice that without the statement of the defendant, the prosecution may have provided a strong case for the defence team to argue that the case be dismissed on technical grounds.
The Justice ministry, according to our sources, also said that the case cannot survive because the judges of the tribunal are not there to help the prosecution to prepare a watertight case.
“If the prosecution leaves a loose end for the defence team to exploit, the judge will have no option than to throw out the case. This has been the bane of the anti-corruption war in this country. That is why the investigators and the prosecution must always do their job diligently if we are going to make a headway in punishing corrupt practices,” the source added.
It was further gathered that the federal government may have withdrawn the case to enable its investigating and legal teams to do the proper thing.
It is believed that the former minister may be invited and confronted with the allegations against him so that he can make a statement and “after the due process is followed, he may be compelled to re-appear at the tribunal.”
The issue of failure to invite a defendant to make statements before commencement of prosecution is now an issue of contention in the Saraki case before CCT as the lead counsel to the Senate President, Kanu Agabi (SAN), at the last hearing of the suit on March 18, contended that the failure of the Code of Conduct Bureau to invite his client to make a statement has resulted in denial of fair hearing and, therefore, vitiates the validity of the suit against him.
Sources say that the prosecution in the Saraki case has realised the fundamental flaw in the case and it would have also preferred to withdraw the matter against the Senate President and file it again after getting him to make a statement.
“However, at this stage when the Tribunal is at the stage of ruling on the matter, which may determine the future of the case, the prosecution in the Saraki case is in a dilemma. They have seen that they may lose this case,” said a source in the ministry.
-Leadership
