HomeCourt room newsCourt Adjourns Emefiele’s Trial Over Service of Additional Proof of Evidence

Court Adjourns Emefiele’s Trial Over Service of Additional Proof of Evidence


An Ikeja Special Offences Court has adjourned the trial of the embattled former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, to May 9 over filing of additional proof of evidence served by the prosecution.

Emefiele’s was charged alongside Henry Omoile over allegation of $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion fraud brought against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Justice Rahman Oshodi yesterday adjourned the trial of the defendants after taking arguments from the defendants’ counsel over additional proof of evidence of over 60 pages served on them in the morning by the prosecution.

At the resumed proceeding, the prosecution team led by Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN) told the court that the second prosecution witness was in court for the continuation of cross-examination and that he had served defence the statement of one Mr John Adetola, as an additional proof of evidence.

But the first defendant’s counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN) opposed continuation of trial stating that Emefiele and co-defendant have not seen the documents served on them by the prosecution, stressing that “justice rushed is justice crushed.”

Ojo who said he was constrained to ask the court to do justice, pointed out that the additional proof of evidence ought to have been served on the defence early enough.

“If it was filed yesterday, we could have burnt candle to go through it. The defendant has not seen it. Defence may find anything useful in the additional proof of evidence of over 60 pages to cross-examine the witness in the box.

“I humbly urge the court to adjourn this matter so that I can thoroughly go through it and study it.”

The second defence counsel, Mr Adeyinka Kotoye (SAN), in his submission, aligned himself with the first defence counsel.

He urged the court to adjourn the case in the interest of justice and to enable them have adequate opportunity to study the additional proof of evidence.

Kotoye said the additional proof of evidence served on them by the prosecution yesterday morning was an ambush.

He urged the court not to entertain ‘trial by ambush’ and put a stop to it.

“I also apply to your Lordship to mandate the prosecution to supply us all relevant materials. In the spirit of fairness, I urge your Lordship to adjourn the case,” Kotoye said.

Oyedepo argued that the two senior advocate defence counsels, whom he held in high esteem, were unfair in their submissions and for describing his team and its activities as “prosecutorial unfairness.”

He told court that one Adetola, listed as the 5th prosecution witness in the proof of evidence, was contained in volume two of what was served on defence on April 4.

He said: “In preparation for his testimony that will be coming up, not today, not even on May 9,  the prosecution, rather than wait for defence to formally place a demand on us on what is in the device, diligence prosecution made me make the device  available to defence.

“My lord, how does that amount to prosecutorial unfairness?

“I plead with defence not to delay this case unnecessarily as we have a witness in the box who had given evidence and he is being cross-examined by the first defence counsel.

“If defence is angry that I served them the proof of evidence today, we can withdraw it and serve same at a later day.”

The prosecution told the court that the society is interested and watching the proceeding of the case.

“The society is interested. They are watching us that will this matter be adjourned based on the evidence of another man who is not the witness in the box?

“We are not rushing or crushing justice, rather, we are aiding the oil of justice to rise steadily.

“Expeditious determination of cases is of utmost importance and so we urge your lordship to allow the cross-examination.” Oyedepo said.

In his ruling, Justice Oshodi, said he had considered the submissions of both the parties and he was satisfied with the reasons given by defence for adjournment.

“I have considered the conflicting submissions regarding whether I should adjourn for further continuation of trial.

“I am satisfied with the reasons given by defence.

“For the adjournment sought, I grant it. I adjourn to May 9, 2024 for continuation of trial.”

The Nation

Share on

Place your
Adver here

For more details, contact

Related articles:

[Download] Judgment of Court Upholding CBN’s Regulation on Collection of Customers’ Social Media Handles

On Wednesday, 15th May 2024, Honourable Justice Nnamdi Dimgba...

[Download] Federal High Court Practice Direction on the E-Affidavit Regime

The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court Hon....

Industrial Court 2024 Annual Vacation Begins July 29

The Hon. President of the National Industrial Court of...

Court Affirms 25 Pro-Wike Lawmakers as PDP Members

A Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt...

Tariff  Increase: Tribunal Fines Multichoice N150m, Free Subscription to Nigerians 

A Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal (CCPT) on Friday...