An attempt by the Sani Katu, the counsel to Abdulrasheed Maina, the former Chairman of the defunct Pension Reform Task Team, PRTT, to withdraw from the money-laundering was Wednesday rejected by Justice Okon Abang to avoid “compounding the case and holding the court to ransom”.
“The application to withdraw legal representation and cause confusion in this matter lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed”, Justice Abang held, even as he agreed with the Prosecution that Katu failed to comply with section 349(8) of ACJA, 2015.
Justice Abang noted that he had on December 21, 2020, after Maina announced his intention to call a total of 24 defence witnesses, adjourned the trial for over 76 days.
He said despite the long adjournment, Maina, waited until last Monday to apply for a subpoena to compel witnesses to appear on his behalf.
Justice Abang disclosed that he was in his Chambers when the court clerk brought copies of subpoenas Maina filed to compel the appearance of 10 persons as witnesses.
He wondered why Maina should approach the court to compel witnesses to attend proceedings the next day.
“I merely signed the subpoenas based on the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Olisa Metuh, in which he had applied to call Dasuki as a witness.
“Ordinarily, I could not have on my own, sign a subpoena to compel anybody to come before the court a day before hearing”.
He said Maina should have himself to blame if the subpoenaed witnesses fail to appear in court.
“The 1st Defendant has been given the opportunity to defend this matter and he has failed to use the opportunity”, Justice Abang added.
Katu, hinged the withdrawal from the case on Maina’s request in another court to summon 10 persons to appear as witnesses in the matter without his knowledge
Maina, who is answering to a 12-count money laundering charge the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, preferred against him and his firm, Common Input Property and Investment Limited, had through another lawyer, approached another court to summon 10 witnesses to appear as witnesses.
Among the 10 persons, the former pension reform boss secured subpoenas to compel them to testify in the matter, included the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, and the former Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Ibrahim Magu.
Others are a renowned Lagos-based lawyer, Femi Falana, M. Mustapha, Hassan Salihu, Mohammed Wakil, G.T Idris, Kenneth Amabem, Ibrahim Kaigama, as well as the Director of Compliance at the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN.
Katu, a Senior Advocate said he was not informed before the subpoenas were sought and obtained by his client, Maina.
The senior lawyer said he had in furtherance of his defense for the Defendants, applied for only three subpoenas, which he said was to be issued against three banks that included the CBN.
“I was not aware of the other 10 subpoenas. I did not apply for them”, he added.
Katu, who has been leading Maina’s defense team, had at the resumed proceedings in the case on Wednesday, notified the trial court of his decision to pull out from the case.
He said: “My lord, the matter is adjourned for continuation of hearing and for us to bring another witness today. But, before then, we have an application we are compelled to make.
“The application is to seek for leave of this Court to withdraw from this matter. In doing this, we appreciate the court’s indulgence”.
However, the Prosecution counsel, Farouk Abdullah, opposed the withdrawal application and urged the court to compel Maina and his defense team to proceed with the business of the day.
Abdullah contended that Maina’s lawyer, Katu, failed to fulfill the statutory condition precedent that would have paved way for him to withdraw from the trial.
“My lord, as rightly stated, this matter is slated today for continuation of defense. While we concede that a Defendant has the constitutional right to a counsel of his choice, and a counsel in the matter can also withdraw at any time he deems fit.
“However, our only reservation is the non-compliance to section 349(8) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.
“In view of the non-compliance of senior counsel to the provision of the extant law on withdrawal of counsel, we pray the court to refuse the application and direct that the business of the day be done”, Abdullah submitted.
Responding, Katu, prayed the court for a short adjournment to enable him to file a formal application to withdraw from the trial.
“In as much as he has stated the law as it is, which requires that I notify the court in not less than three days before the date fixed for hearing.
“We have complied with the section, in that we appeared for the first Defendant yesterday, and in an attempt not to spring surprises on the Prosecution, I specifically told the Prosecution, off record, of our desire to withdraw from this matter. Hence my inability to file a formal application.
“May I humbly apply for a short adjournment”, Katu added.
Interestingly, Katu is the second Counsel to withdraw from the trial. It will be recalled that the previous defence lawyer in the matter, J. K. Gadzama pulled out of the case after his client, Maina, jumped bail and fled the country midway into his trial.
Similarly, counsel that hitherto represented Maina’s firm, Adeola Adedipe, also withdrew his further appearance in the matter.
The former pension reform boss had shortly after he was arrested in the Niger Republic and returned back to the country by Interpol, engaged another lawyer, Anayo Adibe to handle his defence.
However, a few days before the commencement of his defence to the charge, Maina brought in Katu, to take over from Adibe.
Meanwhile, following the dismissal of his oral application to withdraw from the case, Katu, SAN, told the court that Maina’s second witness, DW-2, whose name was given as Charles Enakaeno, had an accident and was unable to attend the proceedings.
He, therefore, persuaded the court to adjourn the matter till Thursday.
EFCC had in the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/256/2019, alleged that Maina used a bank account that was operated by his firm and laundered funds to the tune of about a N2billion, part of which he used to acquire landed properties in Abuja.
It told the court that the 1st Defendant (Maina) used fictitious names to open and operate various bank accounts, as well as recruited his relatives that were bankers to operate fake bank accounts through which illicit funds were channelled.
The Prosecution maintained that the Defendants committed criminal offences punishable under sections 11(2) (a), 15(3), and 16(2) (c) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, and also acted in breach of the Advance Fee Fraud Act.
The Defendants who were arraigned on October 25, 2019, pleaded not guilty to the charge.
EFCC had earlier closed its case against the Defendants after it called a total of nine witnesses, even as the court-ordered Maina to open his defence to the charge.
Maina had since called one witness that testified on his behalf.
Comments are closed.