Monday, December 23

Date Set for Fani-Kayode Money Laundering Trial

THE trial of former aviation minister, Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode, will commence February 11, 2013, according to an update from the Federal High Court handling the case in Lagos.

Faced with a 47-count charge of money laundering, in violation of the money laundering (prohibition) Act of 2004, Mr. Fani-Kayode was initially billed to appear in court on Thursday this week but for the absence of the new trial judge, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia, was attending a conference meant for judges of the Federal High Courts.

Ofili-Ajumogobia, the third trial judge to sit on the trial, is the new judge assigned to replace Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako, who was transferred from the Lagos division of the Federal High Court.

Recall that Fani-Kayode had been re-arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on February 16 this year, before  Murtala-Nyako.

Fani-Kayode’s re-arraignment before Murtala-Nyako followed the transfer of Justice Ramat Mohammed, who was the first trial judge to handle the matter.

He had pleaded not guilty to the charges and had been admitted to bail.

Mr Chris Uche (SAN), counsel to the accused, had prayed the court to stay further proceedings in the matter in April, citing another case of appeal at the Supreme Court.

Uche had tendered a Certified True Copy (CTC) of the Motion on Notice for hearing of the matter at the apex court, as evidence that an appeal had been filed.

The request for stay of proceedings wasopposed by EFCC counsel, Mr. Nelson Okedinachi, on the ground that the defense was only seeking for an avenue to stall proceedings.

According to Okedinachi, the appeal was merely an academic exercise since the matter was commencing afresh before Murtala-Nyako and the plea of the accused had been taken afresh.

He had argued that the stay of proceedings sought by the defence was not covered by the EFCC Act, and urged the court to fix a date for the trial.

Justice Murtala-Nyako declined to grant the stay of proceedings on the ground that the appeal had nothing to do with the matter before her.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *