BHaram: Court refuses FGs request in Kogi varsity lecturer, others trial The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja yesterday declined an application filed by the federal government, seeking a modification of the earlier partial secret trial the court had granted for the trial of Dr. Mohammed Yunus, a lecturer at the Kogi State University and two other accused persons for alleged Boko Haram activities. The trial judge, Justice Gabriel Kolawole held that the court did not have powers to vacate its earlier ruling on partial secret trial of the accused persons. He said: The court can only vacate such an order when it does not have powers to have made such an order. Justice Kolawole further held: The court has no constitutional power to completely shield the witnesses completely from court staff. Acceding to such an application would amount to having empty benches in the court to testify before as there will be no one in attendance, the judge held. The motion by the prosecution counsel is hereby refused, and the case is adjourned till June 9, 2014 for trial. Justice Kolawole ordered that the accused persons be remanded in Kuje Maximum prison and reproduced in court at the next adjourned date. Nigerian pilot recalled that the court had on April 3, 2014 ordered for the partial protection of witnesses that are to be presented by the prosecution counsel. However, at the last hearing, the prosecution counsel, Mr. A. Ogunsina sought a change of the earlier order of the court for a partial protection of the witnesses to a complete protection of the identities of the witnesses. In a five paragraph in support of the application dated May 2, 2014, filed and served on the same day, pursuant to Section 6 Sub-section 6 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended and Order 26 Rule 17 of the Federal High Court procedure Rule, 2009 as well as Section 34 of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2013 as amended, Mr. Ogunsina had prayed the court to vacate its earlier order of April 3, 2014, which it granted partial secret trial for the accused persons. Mr. Ogunsina had submitted: It is the conviction of the prosecution that it will be neater and better if our order is granted, he said. While arguing on the application, counsel to the 1st accused person, Mr. Hassan Liman (SAN), objected the application by Mr. Ogunsina. Mr. Liman had contended: The court has no power under the under Section 6 Sub-section 6 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended to set aside its earlier decision after final arguments in the matter had been taken. He submitted that the court would operate serious injustice to the accused persons if the application for a total protection of the witnesses by the prosecution is granted. Liman further submitted that it is an abuse of court process by inviting the court to re-open a matter which the Supreme Court only has power to review. Relying on the submissions made by Mr. Liman, Counsels to the 2nd and 3rd accused persons, Chief James Ocholi (SAN) and Mr. Abdul Mohammed, unanimously opposed the application. They described it as A ploy by the prosecution to conceal the identities of their agents with which they intent to secure conviction at all cost against the accused persons.
Posted on: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:51:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015