Akin kuponiyi
Rickey Tarfa and Joseph Nwobike
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has revealed the reason they docked Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Rickey Tarfa, for alleged attempt to pervert the course of justice.
This revelation is contained in the counter affidavit in response to the application filed by Rickey Tarfa urging Justice Aishat Opesanwo of the Lagos State High Court, Igbosere, to quash the charge against him before the court.
Tarfa now standing trial before the court was arraigned 16 February on a two-count criminal charge bordering on alleged willful obstruction of an officer of the agency to carry out his lawful duty.
In the second count Tarfa was alleged to have attempted to pervert the course of justice. He pleaded not guilty to the charge.
The counter affidavit filed by EFCC in opposition to the application to quash the charge, deposed to by one of the agent of EFCC, Sanusi Mohammed , revealed how Tarfa allegedly committed the said offences.
In a twenty-eight paragraph affidavit, Mohammed averred that in the process of investigating a petition dated 16 December, 2013, written by a Lagos lawyer, Mr Femi Falana, the defendant filed two fundamental rights enforcement suits No FHC/L/CS/715/2015- Rena Prestige Industries Nigeria Ltd and Mr. Gnanhouse Sourou Nazaira Vs EFCC and two others and FHC/L/CS/716/ 2015- Hair Prestige Manufacturing Nigeria Ltd Vs EFCC and two others respectively at the Federal High Court, Lagos division on behalf of his clients against EFCC.
Mohammed also averred that Justice Mohammed Yunusa of the Federal High court presided over the two suits in which the judge delivered judgement 8 September, 2015 respectively in favour of the defendants and his clients, and the court also awarded N10 million in the two cases as damages against the EFCC and two other respondents.
EFCC further stated that during the pendency of the proceedings in the said suits, the commission received intelligence report that Tarfa was allegedly communicating with Justice Yunusa with a view to getting a favourable judgment against the commission.
EFCC also stated that the investigation confirmed this report and further revealed that the chambers of the defendants were in the habit of instructing the registrars of the Federal High Court to assign matters being handled by the chambers to Justice Yunusa .
At the resumed hearing of the matter on Monday, 14 March, which was slated for the hearing of the application, the counsel to the defendant Nnaemeka Nigige (SAN) told the court that the EFCC served them their counter affidavit on Friday at about 2:50pm, which made them unable to reply the counter until Monday morning in the court.
The EFCC prosecuting counsel Gbolahan Latona, in his response, confirmed that they received further and better affidavit, adding that they needed more time to study the reply served on them for them to reply.
The presiding Judge, Aishat Opesanwo adjourned till 21 March for the hearing of the pending applications.
Why Rickey Tarfa was charged to court —EFCC
0 Comments: