Darius Ishaku, the former governor of Taraba State, and Bello Yero, the former Permanent Secretary in the Ministry for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs in the state, will await the court outcome of their preliminary objection, which challenged the jurisdiction of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Abuja, presided over by Justice S.C. Oriji, to hear their trial.
The court made this decision on Wednesday, November 13, 2024, during the matter’s hearing.
EFCC Spokesman Dele Oyewale disclosed this in a statement.
The two former Taraba State’s top shots are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 15-count charge bordering on criminal breach of trust, conspiracy, and conversion of public funds in the state to the tune of N27 billion.
Both defendants in the preliminary objection prayed the court to dismiss the trial based on the lack of jurisdiction by the court to hear the matter, arguing that their alleged offence did not take place in Abuja, where the court is sitting.
Prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, stated in his response that the court had jurisdiction on the matter.
He pointed to the prosecution’s counter-affidavit and urged the court to dismiss the defence application.
“We filed a counter-affidavit to assist the court, sworn to by Agumowo Chidera. We rely on the affidavit and urge your Lordship to dismiss the applications of the first and second defendants. We also filed a written address, and we humbly adopt the said counter-affidavit as our counter argument. On the issue of jurisdiction that was raised, your lordship may deliver the ruling and save the time of the court. There is substantive jurisdiction, which is the law that creates the charge; your lordship has jurisdiction to listen to the charge. Territorial jurisdiction is the one they are alleging. We urge your lordship to dismiss their application,” he said.
In his ruling, Justice Oriji, citing Section 396(2) of the ACJA, 2015 adjourned ruling on the objection till the end of the trial. He held that Section 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA 2015, provides that “after the plea has been taken, the defendant may raise any objection to the validity of the charge or the information at any time before judgement, provided that such objection shall only be considered along with substantive input and ruling thereof made at the time of delivery of judgment.” Pursuant to this provision, I order that the ruling on the preliminary objections of the defendants shall be delivered at the time of delivery of judgement at the end of the trial.”
Justice Oriji, thereafter, adjourned the matter till January 21, 28, and 29 for continuation of trial.
