The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
cannot be compelled to prosecute all the former members of the last
National Assembly, who benefited in the jumbo pay for which the former
Speaker of the House, Mr. Dimeji Bankole, was alleged to have illegally
borrowed money to fund.
Bankole and his deputy, Usman Nafada, are facing charges on their alleged role in illegally obtaining and disbursing the loan.
But prominent lawyers in the country said all the members of the former National Assembly, who also shared in the loan, might not be tried by the EFCC.
Among the lawyers who spoke to our correspondent on Sunday included Lagos-based human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, who said EFCC had the power to decide on who to prosecute.
“Usually, the prosecutor has the power to decide on who it prosecutes and may even decide to use some of the suspects as witnesses,” he said.
He argued that going by the nature of the allegation faced by Bankole and Nafada, the EFCC might need to extend its investigation to the Senate.
“I’m not sure the investigation has been completed. If you look at the charges, there is no way that the net will not be extended even to the Senate; I mean if justice is going to be done,” Falana said.
Another Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs, in a separate interview with our correspondent also supported Falana’s position.
Jacobs said, “Where an offence is committed by several people, the government or the prosecution has the prerogative as to who should face the trial. It is at the discretion of the prosecutor to choose who to prosecute.
“If you charge all of them, you may not have the machinery to prosecute everybody.”
On what could be the usefulness of other accomplices to the trial, like Falana, Jacobs said the prosecution might use them as witnesses.
Jacobs said, “When you are handling a criminal case, you may decide not to prosecute some of the accomplice, but you can use some of them as witnesses. The accomplice can give evidence; so long there is other evidence aside from the evidence of the accomplice.
“But the only thing is that the judge has to look for other evidence that will corroborate the one the accomplice is giving.”
They declined comments on the credibility or otherwise of such testimonies likely to be given by the staff of the National Assembly, saying it would amount to making prejudicial comments on a matter awaiting the court’s decision.
On the appropriateness of Mr. Festus Keyamo to hold brief for the EFCC in court as an interested party, Falana said he could not comment on it because “a preliminary objection has been raised by Bankole along this line and that matter is pending in court. Again, I cannot comment on that.”
The human rights lawyer, however, urged the media and Nigerians at large to focus on how to prevent the newly inaugurated National Assembly from embarking on frivolous loans and appropriating jumbo pay to themselves.
By Ade Adesomoju Courtesy Of: Punch
Bankole and his deputy, Usman Nafada, are facing charges on their alleged role in illegally obtaining and disbursing the loan.
But prominent lawyers in the country said all the members of the former National Assembly, who also shared in the loan, might not be tried by the EFCC.
Among the lawyers who spoke to our correspondent on Sunday included Lagos-based human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, who said EFCC had the power to decide on who to prosecute.
“Usually, the prosecutor has the power to decide on who it prosecutes and may even decide to use some of the suspects as witnesses,” he said.
He argued that going by the nature of the allegation faced by Bankole and Nafada, the EFCC might need to extend its investigation to the Senate.
“I’m not sure the investigation has been completed. If you look at the charges, there is no way that the net will not be extended even to the Senate; I mean if justice is going to be done,” Falana said.
Another Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs, in a separate interview with our correspondent also supported Falana’s position.
Jacobs said, “Where an offence is committed by several people, the government or the prosecution has the prerogative as to who should face the trial. It is at the discretion of the prosecutor to choose who to prosecute.
“If you charge all of them, you may not have the machinery to prosecute everybody.”
On what could be the usefulness of other accomplices to the trial, like Falana, Jacobs said the prosecution might use them as witnesses.
Jacobs said, “When you are handling a criminal case, you may decide not to prosecute some of the accomplice, but you can use some of them as witnesses. The accomplice can give evidence; so long there is other evidence aside from the evidence of the accomplice.
“But the only thing is that the judge has to look for other evidence that will corroborate the one the accomplice is giving.”
They declined comments on the credibility or otherwise of such testimonies likely to be given by the staff of the National Assembly, saying it would amount to making prejudicial comments on a matter awaiting the court’s decision.
On the appropriateness of Mr. Festus Keyamo to hold brief for the EFCC in court as an interested party, Falana said he could not comment on it because “a preliminary objection has been raised by Bankole along this line and that matter is pending in court. Again, I cannot comment on that.”
The human rights lawyer, however, urged the media and Nigerians at large to focus on how to prevent the newly inaugurated National Assembly from embarking on frivolous loans and appropriating jumbo pay to themselves.
By Ade Adesomoju Courtesy Of: Punch
No comments:
Post a Comment