A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed December 14, 2018, to rule in a suit challenging the freezing of an account belonging to Pinnacle Communications Ltd by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) over an allegation of N2.5 billion fraud.
Pinnacle Communications Limited is the only private licensed signal distributor for the Federal Government approved implementation of the transition from analogue to digital terrestrial television broadcasting in Nigeria in accordance with the 2012 government White Paper section 11.2 (a) which approved that ‘more than one signal distributor be licensed in addition to NTA-the public licensed signal distributor, a nother signal distributor should be licensed immediately”.
The ICPC had claimed that Pinnacle was fraudulently recommended to the Minister of Information and Culture for the release of N2.5 billion against the guidelines contained in the White Paper.
ALSO READ: EFCC arraigns 2 oil marketers over $8.4m theft
The date was fixed by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba after hearing the submissions of counsel in the matter.
Moving his motion on notice, the plaintiff’s counsel urged the court to lift the order of post-no-debit placed on the account of Pinnacle domiciled in Zenith bank.
The plaintiff counsel, N. Ekanem (SAN) told the court that the ICPC has not adduced cogent reasons why the order freezing the account should be granted and further argued that what the commission has continued to say was that they are still conducting investigation on the source of the fund.
He disclosed that chairman of Pinnacle, as a mark of respect for ICPC honoured an invitation extended to him on November 14, where he made a statement under caution and was subsequently granted bail.
“You cannot clamp down our client’s account based on mere suspicion and not even with a valid court order”, he told the court.
Reacting to the notices of preliminary objection filed by E. A Shogunle, counsel to the 1st respondent (ICPC), and Abdullahi Abubakar, counsel for the 3rd respondent (AGF), Ekanem insisted that the claim of respondents that they are challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter was misconceived.
The plaintiff’s counsel, in urging the court to dismiss the objection said what the respondents referred to as an order of court was an ICPC order.
Ekanem told the court that the 21 days given to ICPC to conclude the investigation and unfreeze the account have elapsed, yet the agency did not comply with the directive.
However, ICPC and AGF contended that the plaintiff’s claim was purely a matter between the company and Zenith bank, and therefore should be at the Federal Capital Territory High Court.
Shogunle argued that what the ICPC did was temporary seizure of the fund pending the outcome of investigation adding that there was evidence of money laundering which suggested that the fund was a proceed of unlawful activity.
Consequently, Shogunle said, in accordance with section 45 of ICPC Act, the commission’s chairman can order a bank to temporarily freeze a suspected account.
After hearing counsel, Justice Dimgba fixed December 14, for ruling.
A recent statement by the ICPC spokesperson, Rasheedat Okoduwa last Thursday, had mentioned the company among those quizzed in connection with the alleged fraud.
and then