Jewelry theft: Jonathan has no hand in incarceration of 15 suspects — Bayelsa Judiciary

The Bayelsa State High Court has dismissed reports alleging that the judicial system is deliberately delaying the trial of 15 suspects accused of stealing jewelry from the home of former First Lady, Mrs. Patience Jonathan, stating that she has no involvement in the case.

The court’s reaction follows reports in some sections of the media alleging that the trial of the 15 domestic staff members of the former First Lady, who are facing charges of burglary and theft, is being delayed due to the influence of prominent Nigerians.

The court described these reports as false and misleading.

The alleged false media report also claimed that the former First Lady was responsible for the prolonged incarceration of the 15 suspects, who are currently remanded at the Medium Security Correctional Centre in Okaka, Yenagoa.

Investigations reveal that the 15 suspects, including domestic staff of the former First Lady, have been standing trial for their alleged involvement in the missing jewelry case since 2019.

ALSO READ:  ‘N750m Jewelry theft’: Sowore slams Patience Jonathan for prosecuting domestic staff

In a statement issued by Julius Nyananyo, Head of Media and Information at the Bayelsa State High Court, and made available in Yenagoa, the court stated that, as a responsible institution committed to justice and fairness, it wishes to set the record straight.

“The said case is being prosecuted by the state against the 15 persons as defendants and is currently being handled in High Court 1, presided over by Hon. Justice Matilda Ayemieye, Chief Judge of Bayelsa State. The charge sheet includes allegations of armed robbery and attempted murder.

“The case was assigned to Hon. Justice Ayemieye in 2019 before she became the Chief Judge. Her Lordship granted an accelerated hearing to ensure the case is handled promptly,” the statement read.

“From available records, delays in the matter have resulted from the involvement of multiple defense lawyers who must each cross-examine witnesses, thereby slowing down proceedings. The case has also suffered several adjournments at the instance of counsels.

“Her Lordship had previously advised the defense team to reduce the number of lawyers involved in the interest of the accused persons and the speedy resolution of the case.”

Nyananyo stated that the court has consistently sat on all scheduled hearing dates and that the delay in the matter cannot be attributed to the court.

He further explained that the defense lawyers recently applied for a trial-within-trial, which the court granted—a development that will understandably lead to further delays.

On the issue of bail, Nyananyo clarified that bail applications were determined on merit and based on the materials presented before the court.

According to the statement, some of the defendants were granted bail, and those dissatisfied with the court’s decision are at liberty to seek a review by appealing to higher courts.

“It is sad and worrisome that the online platform discarded the ethics of the journalism profession and resorted to using highly derogatory language that violates public decency in its reference to the Chief Judge.

“We categorically deny, as false and untrue, any claim that a person or authority is exerting influence or dictating the pace of the case.

“The use of such offensive language against the presiding judge and the office of the Chief Judge is most unfortunate and violates fundamental journalistic principles,” Nyananyo said.

He urged the media platform to prioritise investigative journalism over hearsay in the interest of justice and public good.

NIGERIAN TRIBUNE