A Failed Plea Deal

A Failed Plea Deal Published by TheNEWS Magazine Nnamdi Felix / Abuja In an apparent move to curtail the outrage and public out cry that trailed last Monday's conviction and sentencing of former Assistant Director of Police Pension Office, Mr. John Yahaya Yusufu, by an Abuja High Court, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, re arrested him and dragged him before a Federal High Court on a four counts charge relating to non declaration of assets. He was subsequently arraigned and remanded in Kuje Prison pending his trail scheduled to commence in March. Yusufu's current travails is a fallout of a scuttled agreement reached with the anti graft agency while negotiating his plea bargain deal. Conscious of the uproar created by the infamous plea bargain deal with former managing director of defunct Oceanic International Bank, Mrs. Cecilia Ibru, the anti graft agency pursued the deal with Mr. Yusufu quite cautiously. An insider, who is in the know of the contents of the agency's agreement with the convicted former pension chief, but seeks not to be mentioned, informed TheNEWS that both the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke and the chairman of the EFCC, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde only acquiesced to the Yusufu's plea deal when custodial sentencing was included in the package. "The AGF and Lamorde refused to go along with the plea bargain. It was only after the EFCC lawyer insisted and extracted Yusufu's consent to forfeit properties he bought with the pension loot scattered in Gombe GRA and Abuja as well as the N325 million found in his account and the custodial sentencing clause, that the lawyer now presented the agreement to the chairman who then secured AGF's ascent before the deal was concluded" the source told TheNEWS. As part of the understanding reached with Yusufu, the anti graft agency swung into action. First, it amended an earlier 16 counts charge filed before the Abuja High Court against Yusufu and his former colleagues with whom he allegedly embezzled a whooping N39 billion. The earlier charge filed on the 28th of March, 2012 to which Yusuf, Essai Dangabar, Atiku Abubakar Kigo, Ahmed Inuwa Wada, Mrs. Veronica Ulonma Onyegbula and Sani Habila Zira pleaded not guilty when they were first arraigned, was brought principally under section 315 of Penal Code Act, Cap 532 Laws of Federal Capital Territory, Abuja Nigeria, 2007. This section provides as follows: "Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property in his capacity as a public servant or in the way of his business as a banker, factor, broker, legal practitioner or agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 14 years and shall also be liable to fine"  The charge was amended to 20 counts while counts 18, 19 and 20 to which Yusufu had agreed to plead guilty to, were brought under section 309 of the Penal Code which provides for two years imprisonment with an option of fine in the sum of N250, 000 only! This change in sections of the law only affected the 3 counts which, according to the agreement, Yusufu was to plead guilty and accept a custodial sentence of two years on each of the counts which would have ran concurrently. In effect, Yusufu was to plead guilty to the 3 counts and get two years imprisonment, not six, as the terms would run concurrently. This position, according to Mr. Rotimi Jacob, a senior advocate of Nigeria, in open court during that proceedings, was communicated to the court so as to be adopted as the court's decision in the matter. Everything worked according to the script without any hitch from the point of plea taking and his conviction. After being convicted summarily by the court based on his guilty plea, Yusufu's lawyer, Mr. Maiyaki Theodore Bala, began to make an application for the court's leniency on his client. This is routine. Normally, a first time offender upon conviction would ask the court to temper justice with mercy. Mr. Bala told the court that Yusufu is a first time offender with no record of any previous crimes, a position which the EFCC collaborated. He also told the court that his client had saved the precious time of the court by his plea and have shown remorse for his crimes, adding that Yusufu has a medical challenge in the form of a chronic heart condition which has aggravated to serious case of high blood pressure, a condition that requires frequent medical attention. For a clincher, the lawyer added that his client has grown to become a community leader with a number of Nigerian students depending on him for their scholarship as well as his family of four, a wife and three children, two of who are University students with one  who is a primary school pupil, all of who depend on Yusufu for their upkeep and school fees. He urged the court to temper justice with mercy, more so with the forfeiture of 13 properties scattered in Gombe and Abuja and the sum of N325 million to the Federal Government. The lawyer pleaded with the court to temper justice with mercy by sentencing his client to the least possible term or exercise its discretion and fine him, as provided for under section 309 on which the counts he pleaded guilty to, was brought. A visibly enraged Rotimi Jacob flew up from his seat raising objection to Mr. Bala's submission. He categorically told the trial judge, Justice Talba Mohammed, that the custodial sentencing was an integral part of EFCC's agreement with Yusufu as contained in the documents submitted to the court which is before the court. Rotimi told the court that section provides a maximum of two years or fine or both, but urged the court to send a strong message out that the era of impunity is gone for good in the country and contended that a non custodian sentence will not meet the justice of the case with regard to the amount of money involved in the matter. Mr. Bala countered the EFCC and stated that his client had already forfeited all that he stole from the Pension Office. "The prosecution took everything and left him with nothing, what else do they want? He queried. In the end, the judge relied on the provisions of section 309 under which the EFCC brought the charges and exercised his discretion in Yusufu's favour by granting him the option of fine. The anti graft agency felt betrayed and swooped on the convict even before he could savour the freedom he just purchased with the N750, 000 he paid as fine for the three counts to avoid going to jail.