John Akpanudoedehe
This development confirms SaharaReporters earlier report that Governor Goodswill Akpabio spent N500 million to keep his main rival out of circulation for the April general elections.
Despite Mr. Udoededeghe’s absence, the Akwa Ibom police command this morning arraigned 41 alleged members of the ACN on a three-count charge of treasonable felony.
A similar trumped up charge filed against Mr. Udoededeghe at the Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday collapsed, but he was physically assaulted, re-arrested and dragged of the courtroom on the pretext that he was being flown to Uyo where he was expected to be tried on another charge instigated by the Akpabio-led PDP government.
Police sources declined comments on the whereabouts of the politician, and why he did not show up in court as was expected, on Friday. But our source said the police merely disrupted Senator Akpnaudoedehe's bail processing yesterday so that he could be detained until Monday at Kuje prison in Abuja.
Meanwhile as part of his desperate measures to persecute perceived opponents, Akpabio signed into law today a legislation that would have allowed him to detain anyone in the state for 30 days, but the House of Assembly reduced the period of detention to 14 days. That law may contravene federal laws.
The first charge against the ACN members reads: That you and others now at large on the 22nd day of March 2011 at Idongesit Nkanga Secretariat premises Akwa Ibom State, Uyo, Uyo local Government Area in the Uyo federal High Court did conspire among yourselves to commit felony to wit: treason and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 37 (2) of the criminal code act cap 38, vol.4 laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 2004.
The defense counsel, Mr. Francis Ekanem who led 21 other lawyers to defend the 41 accused persons objected that the charge as laid by the prosecution is contrary to the provision of section 340 subsection 1, 3, and 4 of the criminal procedure law.
He averred that the sections required that a charge of this nature brought before a Federal High Court or other higher court should be by way of information supported by statements taken from witnesses for the prosecution verified on oath or on the alternative, and that such information should be prepared by the direction or the consent of the judge.
The defence counsel further submitted that since the prosecution has failed to comply with section 340 (4) and section 73 of the institution of criminal proceedings in the High Court and by virtue of section 340 (5) the law allows the court to squash any information that goes contrary to foregoing provisions. He therefore urged the court to strike out the case since it is not a court of summary jurisdiction.
However the prosecuting counsel, Mr. E.O. Ajah, urged the court to discountenance the submission of the defence, claiming that section 340 of the criminal procedure law does not relate to trial at the Federal High Court.
He argued that there is no law that says the charge before the Federal high Court should be accompanied by statements of witnesses. He submitted that the charge is proper and should be upheld as such.
The trial judge, Justice E S Chukwu, ruled that the suspect should be remanded in prison custody and adjourned the case till April 8, 2011 for hearing on the preliminary objection.
The effect of the preliminary ruling is that it effectively succeeds in preventing the accused from participating in tomorrow’s National Assembly election.
No comments:
Post a Comment