THE trial within trial scheduled for yesterday in the ongoing police pension scam case before Justice Hussein Baba-Yusuf of High Court 4 Maitama, Abuja, could not hold due to the absence of the third defendant, Ahmed Inuwa Wada.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Wada alongside Esai Dangabar; Atiku Abubakar Kigo; Mrs Veronica Onyegbula; Sani Habila Zira and Christian Madubuike before the court on criminal charges bordering on conspiracy and criminal breach of trust.
Justice Baba-Yusuf had on 30 November, 2016, adjourned till 20 January 2017 the trial within trial on the request of the counsel for the fourth defendant in the case, Earnest Ikeji, who informed the court that his client, Mrs Onyegbula, was absent in court because she was admitted at the Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Abuja.
Ikeji stated that, Onyegbula was rushed to the hospital as a result of a pre-existing medical condition, which he said was known to the prosecution and requested for an adjournment. It was only a person who was alive that could face trial.
Ikeji had on 29 November, 2016, objected to the tendering of the eight statements Onyegbula made to the EFCC by the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) on the ground that the statements, which were made on different days in 2012, were not obtained voluntarily.
The prosecution counsel had sought to tender the statements as exhibits while leading a prosecution witness (PW4), Mustapha Gandaya, in evidence.
Gandaya, who is an operative with the EFCC and a member of the team that investigated the case, told the court that Onyegbula voluntarily made the statements at the EFCC interrogation room, which he said was of international standard.
While urging the court not to admit the statements, hinging his objection on Section 29 (2) (b) of the Evidence Act 2011, Ikeji told the court that Onyegbula was coerced by the EFCC to make the statements.
He, however, requested that should the court decide to admit them as exhibits, there should be a trial within trial for him to prove that the statements were not obtained voluntarily.
On resumption of the case on Friday, Oluwaleke Atolagbe, who appeared for the prosecution, informed the court that the third defendant, Ahmed Wada, was not in court and sought explanation from his counsel for the absence.
Counsel for the third defendant, Yahaya Dangana, informed the court that a letter dated 17 January had been filed with the court and copied the prosecution, informing that Wada had had two series of surgeries on his spinal cord.
He stated that the defendant had last year wrote the prosecution to concede to a request for the release of his international passport to enable him travel to Dubai for medical checkup, which the prosecution refused.
According to Dangana, Wada’s inability to travel out of the country for his retinue checkup worsened his health condition, necessitating his having surgery on the spinal cord and a follow up surgery three days later.
He, however, sought for an adjournment to enable his client be fit to face trial. He told the court that the medical restriction place on Wada to monitor his healing process should not be less than a month.
Atolagbe confirmed to the court that the prosecution got a letter informing it of Wada’s state of health. He, however, said the case could not move on without the third defendant in court.
Counsel for other defendants in the case did not object to the request for adjournment sought by the counsel for the third defendant since it was as a result of health issue.
The presiding judge, Justice Baba-Yusuf, adjourned the matter to 15 March for trial with trial.