$620,000 Bribe: Farouk, Emenalo Ask Court To Stay Proceedings

Following last May's refusal by an Abuja High Court to quash the seven counts charge slammed against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, embattled former Chairman of House of Representatives' Adhoc committee on Fuel Subsidy Regime, Hon Farouk Lawan and the Secretary of the Committee, Boniface Emenalo on Wednesday urged the court to stay further proceedings in their ongoing trial pending their appeal challenging the court's refusal to quash the charge. The duo were accused of receiving the sum of $620, 000 from billionaire businessman, Femi Otedola, as an inducement to influence the report of the committee in favour of Zenon Oil and Gas Limited. Their lawyer, Mr Rickey Tarfa, a senior advocate of Nigeria, informed the court that they have filed a notice of appeal challenging the court's ruling over their application seeking to quash the charge preferred against his clients. He told the court that the notice of appeal was filed on the 6th of June alongside an application seeking for stay of proceedings in the matter pending the hearing and determination of their appeal. The application, according to the senior advocate, was brought pursuant to the provisions of sections 6(6)(a) and (b) praying for an order of the court staying further proceeding in the charge with reference number FCT/HC/CR/76/2013 pending the determination of their appeal. He further stated that the grounds of their appeal include the court's refusal to quash the charge upon their application wherein they maintained that there was no nexus or link between their clients and the alleged crimes as well as the failure of the charge to raise any prima facie case against them. He argued that the stay of proceedings is necessary so as not to overreach the outcome of their appeal. In his opposition to the aplication for stay of proceedings in the matter, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, also a senior advocate of Nigeria, contended that the application filed by the accused persons are contrived to stall their trial and urged the court to refuse it. "This application is frivolous, vexatious and contrived to stall the prosecution of the accused persons" He further added that stay of proceedings is a grave and serious fundamental interuption of the right of the prosecution to prove the criminal conduct of the accused persons and urged the court not to impose a stay of proceedings, especially when the accused persons have failed to demonstrate any special and exceptional circumstance for such stay to be granted. He also argued that the onus is open the accused persons to show why the request for stay of proceedings should be granted in their supporting affidavit to that application but which they failed to discharge. "By the nature of the charge and the status of the accused persons as well as the national policies on trial of corruption cases, there is no fact in their affidavit to indicate that a grant of stay of proceedings will serve the interest of justice and nothing also suggest that the accused persons will suffer any prejudice or legal disability or incapacity if the application uis refused. They are not in custody and their resources to prosecute their appeal is not inhibited in any way. I urge this court not to exercise its discretion in favour of these accused persons who have not shown in any way that the res, the subject matter of their trial, will be affected or destroyed if the application is not granted" Awomolo argued. Thereafter, the presiding judge, Justice Mudashiru Oniyangi, adjourned till the 10th of July, 2013, to deliver his ruling on the motion. Lawan and Emenalo were alleged to have violated the provisions of the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related Offences Commission Act. Count one of the charge reads: “That you,  Farouk Lawan (M) and Mr. Emenalo Boniface (M) sometime in April 2012 or thereabouts in Abuja within the. Federal Capital Territory under the jurisdiction of this honourable court did while acting in the course of your official duties as Chairman and Secretary (respectively) of House of Representatives Adhoc Committee on Monitoring of Fuel Subsidy Regime conspired between yourselves and with each other to corruptly obtain the sum of $3,000,000 for yourselves from Mr. Femi Otedola, Chairman of Zenon Petroleum and Gas Ltd, as inducement to remove the name of Zenon Petroleum and Gas Ltd from the House of Representatives AdHoc Committee on Monitoring of Fuel Subsidy Regime’s Report and did cause the House to remove the name of Zenon Petroleum and Gas Ltd from the said list and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 26(1)(c) of the Independent  Corrupt Practices and Other-Related Offences Act, 2000, and punishable under section 8(1) of the same Act.” In count two, Lawan was accused of corruptly asking for $3,000,000 from Otedola with the intention of favouring the businessman in the report of the adhoc committee, an offence punishable under section 8(1) of the same Act. In count three,  Lawan  was said to have corruptly agreed  to accept the  $3,000,000, while count four of the charge indicated that he obtained $500,000 from Otedola. In the same vein, count five accused Emenalo of asking for$3,000,000 for himself from Otedola as a bribe, an offence punishable under section 8(1) of the ICPC 2000 Act. The prosecution alleged in count six that Emenalo was offered bribe by Otedola but he failed to report the offer to any officer of the ICPC, an offence contrary to section 23(1) of the ICPC Act, 2000, and punishable under section 23(3) of the same 2000 ICPC Act. In count seven, Emenalo was equally accused of receiving  $120,000 from Otedola .