Court to proceed with trial of ex-NUPENG chiefs without 19th defendant

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sitting in Maitama, Abuja, on Wednesday ordered the continuation of the ongoing trial of 20 former leaders of the Petroleum Tanker Drivers (PTD) branch of the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), in the absence of the 19th defendant, Malam Adamu Ibrahim Umaru.

Umaru, alongside a former PTD National Chairman, Lucky Osesua, and 18 others, is standing trial on a five-count charge bordering on attempted murder, breach of public peace, and assault, in a case marked FCT/HC/CR/042/2023.

The defendants are accused of attacking NUPENG National President, Mr. Williams Akporeha; the Union’s Secretary-General, Olawale Afolabi; and the new PTD National Chairman, Augustine Egbon—actions allegedly likely to cause their deaths, among other offences.

Other defendants include Dayyabu Garga, Humble Obinna, Akinolu Olabisi, Godwin Nwaka, Tiamiu Sikiru, Abdulmimin Shaibu, John Amajuoyi, Zaira Aregbo, Patrick Erhivwor, Stephen Ogheneruemu, Gift Ukponku, Sunday Ezeocha, and seven others. All have pleaded not guilty.

At the resumed hearing, prosecuting counsel David Kaswe informed the court that the 19th defendant, Umaru, was absent again, having also missed proceedings in January and March this year.

He urged the court to invoke Section 352(4) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), which permits the continuation of trial in the absence of a defendant who has failed to appear in court without valid justification.

Kaswe argued that Umaru’s repeated absence satisfied the conditions required by the law and was an attempt to stall the trial.

In response, defence counsel Abubakar Sani—standing in for lead counsel Christopher Oshomegie, SAN—confirmed Umaru’s previous absences but explained that the 19th defendant was in custody at the Calabar Correctional Facility, with his movement restricted by circumstances beyond his control.

He argued that Section 352(4) of ACJA was not applicable in this case and maintained that Umaru was still presumed innocent under the Constitution.

However, Kaswe countered that no documentary evidence had been presented before the court to justify the defendant’s absence.

In his ruling, Justice Halilu held that bail is a constitutional right subject to conditions, including the defendant’s obligation to appear in court. He noted that Umaru’s absence constituted a breach of the bail agreement and aligned with the prosecution’s argument.

The judge, therefore, invoked Section 352(4) of ACJA and ordered that the trial should proceed in Umaru’s absence.

Justice Halilu had earlier cautioned that he would revoke the bail of all defendants and remand them in custody if their defence team failed to accord due seriousness to the criminal case.

Following the conclusion of evidence-in-chief by the second prosecution witness, Williams Akporeha (PW2), the judge adjourned the matter to July 9 for cross-examination by the defence.

ALSO READ TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE