The Federal Capital Territory High Court sitting in Maitama Abuja has fixed March 3 for the arraignment of a property developer Mr Cecil Osakwe and two other defendants over an alleged illegal eviction involving properties valued at about ₦300m.
Justice Samira Bature adjourned the matter on Tuesday after proceedings could not continue due to her absence which was attributed to ill health. The defendants Mr Osakwe Mr Victor Giwa and Ms Edith Erhunmuuse are to be arraigned on charges marked FCT HS CR 222 2023.
The defendants are accused of criminal acts bordering on the forceful eviction of occupants and the destruction of properties estimated at ₦300m. The court was informed that the case had experienced several delays in the past including an adjournment granted to allow the third defendant secure legal representation.
Although the third defendant is now represented by counsel Mr C C Onyechere she was absent from court. Her counsel attributed her absence to ill health but failed to present any medical evidence in support of the claim. The prosecution further told the court that at a previous sitting proceedings were stalled because the counsel handling the matter was reportedly on official assignment outside the country.
Justice Bature recalled that the court had earlier warned against unnecessary delays capable of frustrating the arraignment of the defendants. Counsel to the first defendant Mr Ayuba Kawu and the second defendant Mr Giwa who represented himself opposed the prosecution application for adjournment. Kawu informed the court that his client had travelled from the United States solely to attend the hearing but no proof of the trip was presented when requested.
Kawu urged the court to strike out the charge for lack of diligent prosecution describing the prosecution as unserious. In her ruling Justice Bature held that although there had been multiple adjournments largely at the instance of the defence the prosecution deserved the benefit of the doubt. She therefore overruled the objection and refused to strike out the charge.
The judge also directed that all pending applications challenging the jurisdiction of the court would be taken when the prosecution is present to respond. She emphasised that in the interest of justice both parties must be given fair opportunity to be heard and ordered that the third defendant must appear in court on the next adjourned date.
Leave a comment