By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
The continuation of trial of Senator Peter Nwaoboshi representing Delta North Senatorial District before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of a Federal High Court Lagos Nigeria, could not proceed as scheduled on Thursday following the rejection of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) third winess from Zenith Bank whose name and statement were not attached in the proof of evidence.
When the case came up on Thursday, O.A.R Ogunde (SAN) announced his appearance for the prosecution, while G.N Uwechue (SAN) with G.A.I Mowa appeared for first defendant.
Charles Nmarkwe and Onyebuchi Aniakor announced appearancesfor second and third defendants respectively.
Ogunde told the court that in continuation of the trial, the prosecution is ready to go on with the prosecution witness present in court and urged the court to call the witness to the witness box.
Shortly after the witness mounted the witness box, took an oath and announced his name as Eyituoyo Mogboyiteron from Zenith Bank, Mr Mowa raised an objection that the witness name is not listed in the proof of evidence before the court.
Mowa further submitted that there is no statement made by the witness before the EFCC and therefore should not be a allowed to testify in the instant case.
“The name of the witness is not listed in the proof of evidence and no statement of the witness in the processes filed by the prosecution.
“My submission on law is the golden rule to afford the defendant
a fair hearing and not to ambush him. This is an ambush”
He added that the whole purpose of proof of evidence is to be served on the defendant.
Consequently, Mowa urged the court to disallow the witness.
In his submission, second defendant ‘s Nmarkwe alligned with Mowa and held that the witness before the court should not be allowed to give evidence.
Also making his submission, third defendant’s counsel Onyebuchi Aniakor said that he alligned with submission of counsel to first and second defendants but added, “Our submission is that this is not a proper witness in this proceeding.
Responding, the prosecution counsel Ogunde said that the witness is giving evidence as a representative of Zenith bank, arguing that the bank can send any of its staff to represent it and not necessarily a particular person.
“It is the bank that is giving evidence. I do not know of any law that says a representative of any bank is bound to make a statement before giving or tendering evidence in court.
“Such is not bound by law” Ogunde argued.
“I submit that there is nothing in law, no compelling enactment or rule of your lordship that says that the witness cannot testify because he did not make any statement in the instant case.
“There is nothing in the law that says he must go to EFCC and make a statement before he can testify in this case.
“I therefore urge my lord to allow the witness before the court”.Ogunde concluded.
After the arguements by counsel to the parties, Justice Aneke adjourned the case to March 19, 20 and 21 for ruling and continuation of trial.
Nwaoboshi was charged by the EFCC, along with two companies – Golden Touch Construction Projects Ltd and Suiming Electricals, for alleged N322million money laundering.
The commission had re-arraigned the accused before Justice Aneke, on October 5, following the elevatom of the previous trial judge, Justice Mohammed Idris, to the Court of Appeal.
He had pleaded not guilty on his arraignment before Idris, and also, pleaded not guilty to the charges on his re-arraignment before Justice Aneke.
Following his re-arraignment, the case started de novo (afresh).
It would be recalled the prosecution had alleged that Nwaoboshi and Golden Touch Construction Projects, purchased a 12-storey building property, known as Guinea House, on Marine Road in Apapa, Lagos for N805million between May and June 2014.
The anti-graft agency claimed that N322million out of the N805million was part of proceeds of “an unlawful act of fraud.
The EFCC alleged that the N322million was transferred to the property’s vendor, on the order of Suiming Electricals, which was accused of aiding the accused to commit money laundering on or about May 14, 2014.
The alleged offences contravenes the provisions of sections 15(2)(d) and 18(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011.