Court orders former NIMASA MD to open defence in N136m fraud

Justice Mojisola Olatoregun of a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos on Tuesday ordered a former Acting Director General (DG) of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Calistus Obi, alongside one Alu Dismas, who is said to be a former personal assistant to ex DG of NIMASA, Patrick Akpobolokemi, to open their defence in a N136m.

They were dragged before the court over allegation of fraud to the tune of N136m by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Delivering ruling on the no case submission instituted by Obi and Dismas, the judge held that there are legally admissible evidences against the defendants to warrant them to open their defence.

“The central issue to consider having gone through the submissions on all sides is whether there is no legally admissible evidence linking the defendants with the commission of the offence of conversion of money belonging to NIMASA.

“Or that the evidence has been discredited by cross examination, or so manifestly unreliable that no reasonable tribunal or court can act on it as establishing the criminal guilt of the defendant.

“I cannot at this stage go into evaluation of the evidence before me or whether a particular document was wrongly admitted; the key question is whether those evidence can justifiably secure the conviction of the defendants
“I have only the evidence of the prosecution and so, can any reasonable tribunal or judge honestly say that from the evidence so far adduced by prosecution, either directly or circumstantially, that the defendants should not be called upon to make an explanation as regards their conducts? My answer is no.

“I must admit that there is a prima facie case made out against the defendants; this must be distinguished from the proof of the guilt of the defendants, a conclusion which I can only arrive at, at the end of the case, when the court has to find out whether the defendant is guilty or not.

“It is for now immaterial whether or not I believe the evidence of the prosecution; for now, the credibility of the witness does not arise.

“I have juxtaposed the evidence provided by the prosecution in section 15 (1) and 18 (a) of the money laundering prohibition Act and the essential element of the offences, and I am satisfied that the defendants has a reason to be called upon to place their defence before the court.

“The respective submissions on no case by the defence, is hereby over ruled, and I rely on the cases of Obasohan v Federal Government, as well as Amadi vs Federal Government,” she held.

They were alleged to have committed the offence on August 5, 2014.