Trial of ex- NAF boss Umar’s shifted May 23
The trial of former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal, Mohammed Dikko Umar (rtd), fixed for Tuesday could not hold following the absence of Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court Abuja.
The judge was said to be attending the judges conference organized by the United Nations in Abuja. Consequently, the trial has been adjourned to May 23 at the consent of counsel to both parties.
At the last adjourned date, former Director of Finance and Account, Nigerian Air Force, Air Commodore Salisu Yaushau (rtd), told the Federal High Court in Abuja that he had no documented evidence or receipts to show that the former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Mohammed Dikko Umar (rtd), collected the sum of N558million monthly for two years.
Yaushau, a star prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of the former Chief of the Air Staff, yesterday told the Federal High Court in Abuja that the sum N558m he usually gives to the defendant as his monthly upkeep from the coffers of the Nigerian Air Force were not receipted.
The witness had told the court in his evidence-in-chief last week that the former Chief of the Air Staff collected over N13.3b for two years as his monthly upkeep from the coffers of the Nigerian Air force. He also told the court how he assisted Umar to acquire properties across the country worth over N2.3b out of the monthly upkeep of N558m.
But under cross examination by lead defence counsel, Hassan Liman (SAN), the witness said the payments made to Umar were not captured in the cash and votes books of the Nigerian Air force.
The defence counsel tendered in evidence, a book titled “Manual of Financial Administration of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, 2012” which provides that receipt be issued on all payments made by any of the forces.
Though the prosecution counsel, Sylvanus Tahir objected to the admissibility of the book on the grounds that it was not certified as a public document by the relevant authorities, it was admitted in evidence by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba.
Tahir predicated his objections on the provisions of sections 102 and 104 (1) of the Evidence Act, 2010, which required the Certified True Copies (CTC) of all public documents.
In his short ruling, Justice Dimgba agreed with the submissions of the defence counsel that the exhibit was an original copy and therefore needs no certification.
