Maina denies any wrongdoing
Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja on Friday remanded the Chairman of the defunct Pension Reform Task Team, Abdulrasheed Maina and his son, Faisal Maina in correctional centre and police custody respectively, after they were arraigned in court on corruption charges.
Embattled Maina whose 23 properties were temporally forfeited to the federal government was slammed with 12 -count charge by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), while his son was separately arraigned on a three- count charge.
Buhari returns after Russia – Africa Summit
Maina is alleged to have laundered various sum of money using fictitious accounts and other fraudulent activities with some banks in the country.
The 12-count charge was dated October 16 and filed on October 17.
However, he denied any wrongdoing in respect of the charges levelled against him by the EFCC.
In accordance with the provision of Section 478 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, Adeola Adedipe, who appeared for the second defendant, Common Input Property and Investment Limited, a company allegedly owned by Maina, entered a not guilty plea for the company.
Shortly after the charge was read to the defendant, the prosecution counsel, Mohammed Abubakar informed the court that he is ready to call his first witness.
Ahmed Raji (SAN), who announced appearance for Alhaji Maina, interjected by drawing the court’s attention to the defendant’s bail application dated October 22, which he had filed prior to the defendant’s arraignment.
However, the effort by Raji to have the court hear Maina’s bail application was opposed by the prosecution counsel for being incompetent.
Abubakar argued that by making frantic efforts to move the bail application, “the defendants are putting the cart before the horse.”
The EFCC lawyer stressed that the issue of bail application can only arise if there is an adjournment of the matter.
Abubakar reminded the court that the hearing notice served on all parties in the case indicated that all should come prepared for trial to begin, since the charge, proof of evidence and list of witnesses had been served on the defendants.
He however, admitted being served the bail application of the first defendant, but also confirmed that he has not filed a counter affidavit.
The prosecution told the court that the fact that he did not file a counter affidavit in opposition Maina’s bail application does not mean the anti-graft agency has conceded to the application.
The EFCC lawyer said that “anytime the defence counsel files a competent bail application, we will vehemently oppose it.”
When asked by Justice Abang on what he meant by the application for bail being incompetent, Abubakar answered that it was filed before arraignment of the defendant in court.
Consequently, the court asked Maina’s lawyer, Raji for his reaction on Section 356 (1) of ACJA, which the court raised himself which provides that bail application must be filed after arraignment,
In his response, Raji said he needs time to react to the question and therefore, pleaded for an adjournment.
On the prosecution’s position that he was ready to call his witnesses, Raji said in line with Section 36 of the constitution, the defendant is entitled to enough time for adequate preparation for his defence.
He said the charge served on the defendant is in four volumes of 500 pages each and that he has not had time to discuss with the defendant, saying he was only giving seven minutes to chat with Maina at the office of the EFCÇ without privacy.
Having listened to the submissions of the prosecution and defence counsels, the court adjourned the case to October 30, for prosecution to open his case, while Maina’s son also pleaded not guilty to the three-count charge bordering on money laundering.
The court remanded him in police custody to enable the police conclude its investigation on the defendant over alleged possession of illegal firearms.
His case was adjourned to November 6 for trial.
