Tells judge, ‘you can’t hear my case’
In-law freed by court
By Lukman Olabiyi
Attempt by the Lagos State Government to arraign kidnap suspect, Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike alias Evans, on two separate charges yesterday suffered set back as the defendant rebuffed his arraignment before the State High Court, Igbosere. Inability of the court to take his plea and other defendants made Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo to adjourn the trial till October 27, 2017 to hear the applications filed by Evans challenging the court’s jurisdiction to try him. One of the charges preferred against Evans and others included an attempted kidnap the Chairman of The Young Shall Grow Motors, Chief Vincent Amaechi Obianodo. Evans’ counsel, Olukoya Ogungbeje, is seeking to quash the two charges and eleven counts filed against him. According to Ogungbeje, the court had no jurisdiction to hear both charges. In one charge, Evans and the second defendant Victor Nonso Aduba are standing trial on four counts of conspiracy, kidnapping and unlawful possession of firearms. In the second charge, he and three others are facing seven counts of conspiracy, attempted kidnapping, kidnapping, murder and attempted murder. The second to fourth defendants are Joseph Ikenna Emeka, Chiemeka Arinze and Udeme Frank Upong. Meanwhile, yesterday, reprieve came the way of Mr. Okwuchukwu Obiechina, the brother-in-law of Evans, as the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, entered judgment against the police in the fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by the applicant. In the judgment yesterday, Justice Mohammed Idris, declared Obiechina’s arrest and detention, alongside his wife, Onosube, unconstitutional. It held that the remand order, which the police claimed to have obtained from a magistrates’ court was invalid. Apart from ordering the police to immediately release the applicants unconditionally or charge them to court if they have any case against them, the court also awarded N2m damages in their favour. Justice Idris also ordered the police to tender a public apology to the Obiechinas to be published in two national dailies. Lagos State Commissioner of Police, the Nigeria Police and the Special Anti-Robbery Squad were joined as co-respondents in the suit. In the suit, the duo claimed they had been in detention since June 2 owing to their relationship with Evans. The application seeking to quash the two charges before State High Court, Igbosere was brought pursuant to Section 55 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State, 2015 and Sections 36 and 6 (6) (b) of the Constitution. It was argued that all 11-counts in the two charges were bad for duplicity, grossly defective, a gross abuse of court’s process and does not disclose a prima facie case against the defendants. Specifically, Ogungbeje claimed that counts one, two and three in the first charge filed against his client, do not disclose any prima facie case as there is no evidence of death in the proof of evidence in the information filed by the prosecution. Besides, he said counts four and five constitute a gross abuse of court’s process as similar charges of kidnapping had earlier been filed by the prosecution against his client in charge numbers LD/5962/2017 and ID/5970/2017 He said that counts six and seven of the charge is a gross abuse of court process as the same offence of firearms had earlier been filed by the prosecution in charge number LD/5962C/2017. Ogungbbeje further said that Evans had been erroneously charged with a federal offence and under a federal law by the Attorney General of Lagos State. He was arraigned alongside five members of his gang by the Lagos State Government on a two-count charge of conspiracy to commit kidnapping and kidnapping. However, in its counter-affidavit, the state government’s counsel contended that the charge numbers- LD/5962/2017 and ID/5970/2017, referred to by Evans’ lawyer are separate and distinct from the new charges. It was further argued that the second to the fourth defendants in the new charge are not defendants in charge number ID/5970C/2017. The counsel further argued that apart from the confessional statements of Evans, arms and ammunitions were also recovered from him and his cohorts. Government said the charges were valid and competent having satisfied the provisions of the relevant laws and that it has enough evidence to proceed trial against Evans. The counsel further claimed that the application is vexatious and calculated to delay and frustrate the trial of Evans. The court adjourned hearing of the application till October 27.