An unforeseen drama unfolded on Tuesday, stalling the
cross-examination of prosecution witness, Abu Sule, in the case
involving a former governor of Imo State, Ikedi Ohakim.
During the proceeding, prosecution counsel, Festus Keyamo, alleged
that the accused’s son, Emeka Ohakim, went on the trail of the
prosecution witness and threatening him.
Mr. Ohakim is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission for allegedly making a cash payment of $2, 290,000.00 (Two
Million, Two Hundred and Ninety-Thousand Dollars) for a piece of land at
Plot No. 1098 Cadastral Zone A04, Asokoro District, otherwise known as
No. 60, Kwame Nkruma Street, Asokoro, Abuja.
Addressing Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, sitting
in Abuja, Mr. Keyamo said prosecution witness 2, Mr. Sule, who is
managing director of Tweenex Consociate H.D. Limited, telephoned him
about 9.00p.m. on Monday, January 25, saying that the second son of the
defendant, Emeka, visited his (Sule) office at Asokoro to inquire about
his home address from some individuals.
According to Mr. Keyamo, the younger Ohakim allegedly approached
three people, whose names he gave simply as Okon (a driver), Akpabor (a
driver) and Shola (an architect), for information on Mr. Sule’s home
address.
He said, ‘‘We don’t want to distract the court from this trial. But I
thought it goes beyond the issue of counsel to counsel because it
touches on the administration of justice and protection of the witness
concerned.
‘‘We will apply, at this stage, that a word of caution and concern go
out. If it repeats itself, we shall bring appropriate application
before the court over the development.’’
However, in his response, lead counsel to the defendant, Chris Uche,
SAN, expressed shock at what he described as Mr. Keyamo’s outburst,
saying the matter should have been discussed at another gathering rather
than in the open.
According to him, ‘‘I have no doubt that what the prosecution has
said amounts to destabilizing the defence.
Keyamo had been sitting
directly behind us for more than one hour before the case was called,
but he didn’t raise the matter. He also saw the defendant eyeball to
eyeball when he came to our seats, yet he didn’t discuss the matter.
Now, it is on the Internet and it will be in the press tomorrow.’’
The defence counsel, who further urged the court to dismiss the story
as unfounded, said the prosecution could file an application on the
matter as he had mentioned to the court.
After listening to both counsel, Justice Adeniyi, who was visibly
disturbed about the allegation, said there was no harm if the
prosecution had hinted the defendant and his counsels about the
incident.
‘‘I am a bit disturbed. It is a very serious allegation.
We can’t
deny the fact that it also touches on the defendant himself.
Alternatively, you could have asked to seek audience with me in chambers
in the presence of the defence counsel and the defendant,’’ he said.
The defence counsel further told the court that the prosecution
failed to handle the matter properly, adding that his action was not in
consonance with a traditional belief that says an elder should report
any act of misconduct by a child to his father.
In his reaction, Mr. Keyamo said, ‘‘I find it extremely
objectionable. He has said things about my person, whereas I have never
said anything about him. I will not treat an issue of threat to life in
private!
There is no rule of legal practice that says such an issue
should be discussed in private. It depends on my judgment.’’
Consequently, Justice Ademola adjourned the case to Wednesday, January 27 for continuation of trial.
Premium Times
No comments:
Post a Comment