Send Him Back To Prison, Supreme Court Revokes Ajudua’s Bail, Orders His Remand
The Supreme Court, on Friday, revoked the bail that was granted to Lagos socialite, Fred Ajudua, who is facing trial over his alleged complicity in a $1.43m fraud.
In a unanimous decision, a five-member panel of the apex court ordered that he should be returned back to prison custody.
It equally ordered the resumption of hearing on the criminal charge the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, preferred against him.
The judgement followed an appeal marked: SC/CR/51/2019, which the EFCC filed in the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, FRN.
Ajudua was listed as the sole respondent in the appeal.
In the lead judgment that was delivered by Justice Chioma Nwosu-Iheme, the apex court invalidated the bail that was granted to the respondent on December 10, 2018, by the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal.
Justice Nwosu-Iheme faulted the appellate court, stressing that it had no jurisdiction to grant the respondent after it had already declared as incompetent, a brief of argument Ajudua filed in support of his appeal for bail.
Ajudua in the said appeal, challenged the July 5, 2018 ruling of trial Justice Mojisola Dada of the HIgh of Lagos State, Ikeja, which rejected his request for pre-trial bail.
According to the Supreme Court, having found that Ajudua’s brief of argument was incompetent and struck out same, the appellate court was wrong to still rely on it to accede to the Appellant’s prayer for bail.
“It is crystal clear that the lower court was on all fours with the law when it declared the appellant’s brief of argument incompetent and struck it out.
“At that point, the appellant’s (Ajudua’s) appeal was extinguished. There was therefore, nothing more to consider in that appeal. The lower court, at that point, had no jurisdiction to proceed further. It had become functus officio,” Justice Nwosu-Iheme held.
She held that the appellate court, in proceeding to consider the arguments canvassed in the brief of argument it earlier found to be incompetent, engaged in an exercise in futility.
“Since the lower court had no jurisdiction to consider other issues canvassed in the brief of argument, which it had declared incompetent and struck out, it would amount to an academic exercise to delve into any other issue in the appeal.
“This appeal, having been determined on the issue of jurisdiction alone, the issue of bail is inseparable from the appeal itself.
“This appeal succeeds and it is hereby allowed. The decision of the trial court dated the 5th day of July 2018 refusing bail to the respondent (Ajudua) is hereby restored.
“The respondent is to be remanded in prison custody. Accordingly, this case is remitted back to the Chief Judge of Lagos State to be assigned to the same trial judge, M. A. Dada J for the continuation of speedy trial and determination within the shortest possible time,” the Supreme Court held.
It will be recalled that the Embassy of the State of Palestine had in a letter dated August 26, 1993, which was addressed to the then Minister of Foreign Affairs and copied the Inspector General of Police, alleged that Ajudua obtained about $1.43m by false pretence from a Palestinian, Ziad Abu Zalaf , who was based in Germany.
Upon the completion of investigation, the EFCC filed a 12-count charge against Ajudua before the HIgh Court of Lagos State in Ikeja.
In the charge, the EFCC, among other things, alleged that Ajudua conspired with one Joseph Ochunor, who is still at large, to obtain money by false pretences from Ziad Abu Zalaf of Technical International Ltd., a division of Mystic Company Ltd., a German-based company.
It also alleged that, with intent to defraud, Ajudua and Ochunor obtained $268,000 on April 2, 1993 from Zalaf and on May 12, 1993 again obtained the sum of $225,000 from Zalaf.
The EFCC equally claimed that Ajudua and Ochunor, in a bid to give credence to the alleged scam, forged Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, and Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, NNPC, receipts and presented same to the foreigner as genuine.
Shortly after Ajudua was arraigned, his lawyer, Olalekan Ojo, filed an application for him to be released on bail, pending the determination of the case.
Ojo claimed that his client had serious health challenge.
The application was refused by trial Justice Dada who ordered the defendant to submit himself for prosecution.
Dissatisfied with the decision, Ajudua lodged an appeal and secured a favourable ruling.
A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal reversed Justice Dada’s decision and granted him bail.
In its lead verdict that was delivered by Justice Mohammed Garba, the appellate court held that bail was the Appellant’s constitutional right.
Not happy with the judgement, the EFCC persuaded the Supreme Court to set it aside.