Government withdraws criminal conspiracy charges against Saraki and Ekweremadu

altSENATE president Bukola Saraki and his deputy Ike Ekweremadu look set to be let off the hook over allegations that they misled the senate after the federal government filed a motion to withdraw charges of criminal conspiracy that are pending against them.

 

On June 10, Senators Saraki and Ekweremadu, along with a former clerk of the National Assembly, Salisu Maikasuwa and his deputy Ben Efeturi, were arraigned before Justice Yusuf Halilu in corruption charges. They all pleaded not guilty on July 27 and the trial was ongoing but yesterday, the government suddenly decided to end it.

 

An affidavit in support of the motion to withdraw the suit was filed before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory yesterday by a litigation officer from the Federal Ministry of Justice, Odubu Loveme. In the motion Mr Loveme said counsel to the federal government on the matter, Aliyu Umar, told him that he had studied the case diary and had decided to amend the charge in the manner stated on the face of the motion paper.

 

Mr Loveme added: “That I depose to this affidavit in good faith believing same to be correct to the best of my knowledge and information and in accordance with the Oaths Act Cap 01 laws of the Federation of Nigeria.”

 

Based on the amended charge, only Messrs. Maikasuwa and Efeturi would face prosecution. Count one of the charge against the two civil servants, is that of criminal conspiracy punishable under section 97 (1) Penal Code Act ( Northern States) Federation Provisions Act, 1960, Cap 345, laws of the Federation 1990 as amended.

 

The two officials are accused of fraudulently amending the 2015 Senate Standing Orders without the authority of the seventh Senate.  They are also accused of forging a document punishable under section 366 of the Penal Code Act ( Northern States) Federal Provisions Act, 1960, Cap 345, Laws of the Federation 1990 ( as amended).

 

In addition, the Nigerian government also accused them of giving false information with the intention to mislead the public. Mr Umar, in his written address in support of the motion to amend the charge on Thursday, stated that the sole issue for determination is whether the Court can permit the amendment of the charge in terms of the amended charge.

Comments