Absence of EFCC lawyer stalls Oyo-Ita’s N570m fraud trial

The commencement of trial of Mrs. Winifred Oyo-Ita, a former Head of Service of the Federation, was put off on Wednesday, due to absence of the prosecution counsel, Mohammed Abubakar of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in court.

EFCC had on March 23, arraigned Oyo-Ita and eight others on 18 counts of money laundering to the tune of N570m.

Those arraigned alongside the former head of service are Frontline Ace Global Services Limited, Asanaya Projects Limited, Garba Umar and his companies, Slopes International Limited, Good Deal Investments Limited, Ubong Okon Effiok and his own company, U & U Global Services Limited and Prince Mega Logistics Limited.

The defendants were accused of fraudulently collecting duty tour allowances, estacodes, conference fees fraud, receiving kick-backs on contracts and awarding contracts to companies that belong to them.

The EFCC said investigations revealed that “Oyo-Ita, in her role in the civil service as director, permanent secretary and head of service, used her companies as well as Effiok’s and Umar’s companies as fronts to receive kick-backs from contractors of various ministries and parastatals where she worked.”

All the defendants denied the charge and the matter was adjourned to May 27, for prosecution to present its case.

When the case was called on Wednesday, the prosecution counsel was absent in court.

Paul Erokoro (SAN), who announced appearance for Oyo-Ita, said he does not know the reason for the absence of the prosecution counsel. He then urged the court to grant an adjournment.

“Since we do not know why they are not here, we ask for a fairly long adjournment to give the prosecution time subject to the court’s convenience. We also ask that they be issued hearing notices,” he said.

Kaduna state Governor, El Rufai announces 2 weeks Lockdown extension in Kaduna

Lawyers who represented the other defendants aligned themselves with the submissions of Erokoro and did not object to the application for an adjournment.

Justice Taiwo Taiwo, the trial court judge, in his ruling took judicial notice of the prosecutor’s absence.

He also agreed to grant a long adjournment since the matter is not classified urgent and time bound and to give the prosecution time to make himself available.

The judge adjourned the case to July and ordered that a hearing notice should be served on the prosecution.