Davidson Iriekpen
The embattled Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Rickey Tarfa, friday admitted paying the sum of N225,000 to the account of Justice Mohammed Yunusa of the Federal High Court on January 7, 2014.
He was however quick say that the money was not meant to bribe the judge but a donation by a group of lawyers which he only transferred to the judge on their behalf.
Tarfa, who spoke through his lead counsel, Bolaji Ayorinde (SAN) at the hearing of the fundamental rights enforcement suit he filed against his arrest and detention by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC) at the Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday, said the money was a donation towards the burial of the judge's father-in-law, late Alhaji Audi Garba Damasa.
His submission was contained in a 75-paragraph further affidavit deposed to on his behalf by John Odubela, head of chambers.
"That the applicant did not on January 7, 2014 bribe Justice M.N Yunusa with the sum of N225,000 or any other sum at all. That it was common knowledge in legal circles that the judge lost his father in law; Alhaji Audi Garba Damasa on December 28, 2013 in Maiduguri and travelled there to attend to the funeral.
"The applicant and some friends of the honourable justice made some donations towards the said funeral rites and to commiserate with the judge since they could not physically go and commiserate with him in Maiduguri where he was and stayed for a while," he averred.
Ayorinde had adopted the substantive application, the supporting affidavit and other exhibits as well as written address and urged the court to grant his prayers.
He argued that application had nothing to do with the charge at the Lagos State High Court but the arrest of the applicant without reasonable ground of suspicion.
He contended that the arrest was made without arrest warrant or court order, adding that the suspects that the EFCC wanted to arrest were billed to honour their invitation on February 8 and wondered why they decided to come to arrest them on February 5. He insisted that they were entitled to the reliefs being sought. But the defence counsel, Wahab Shittu, prayed the court to dismiss the application or in the alternative stay further proceedings pending the determination of the criminal charge against the applicant at the Lagos High Court.
He argued that the facts and circumstances of the case arose from the incidence of February 5, which had resulted in a criminal action.
According to him, it was a settled law that when there are civil and criminal actions on the same facts and circumstances, the criminal action is determined first.
The respondent also filed a preliminary objection on the ground that the applicant is already facing a criminal charge as a result of the arrest.
He maintained that there was a basis for the arrest of the lawyer.
According to him, he obstructed the agents of the state from carrying out their statutory duties. He said the action was penalised with a minimum of five years imprisonment going by the EFCC Act.
Shittu said the rights of the applicant were not absolute, adding that the action of the applicant by preventing the officials of the state for more than five hours in arresting the two suspects was outrageous, highhandedness and amounts to contempt.
He insisted that the suspects were locked up in the applicants car for hours in order to prevent their arrest.
He further said on the successful arrest of the suspects and the applicant, it was discovered that he had been communicating with judges when his phone log was analysed.
He therefore submitted that the car and phone seized from the applicant were now exhibits that would be used in his prosecution at the state high court and therefore would not be returned to him until the case was dispensed with.
Justice Mohammed Idris, having carefully listened to the submissions and argument of parties adjourned to February 29 for ruling.
No comments:
Post a Comment