Musa Yusuf V. Federal Republic Of Nigeria (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

FREDERICK OZIAKPONO OHO, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

In this Appeal and Cross-Appeal judgment was delivered on the 27-5-2016 by the Kebbi State High Court of Justice, sitting at Birnin Kebbi in which the Appellant as an Accused person was convicted and sentenced on the 3-6-2016 for the offences of Conspiracy and Aiding contrary to Section 8(a) of the Advanced Fee Fraud and Fraud Related Offences.

He was sentenced to six (6) months imprisonment on each count of conspiracy and aiding, and restitution of 25 units of IVECO TRUCKS or its monetary value of Seven Million (?7,000,000.00) Naira per Truck amounting to One Hundred and Seventy Five Million (?175,000,000.00) Naira only.

Dissatisfied with this judgment, the Appellant has appealed to this Court vide a Notice of Appeal dated and filed on the 3-6-2016. There are Four (4) Grounds of Appeal filed which are hereunder reproduced without their particulars as follows:

GROUNDS OF APPEAL:

1. That the trial Court erred in law when it discharged and acquitted the 1st Accused person and convicted the 2nd Accused person (Appellant herein) for conspiracy based on same

1

facts and thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

2. The trial Court erred in law and breached the Appellant?s right to fair hearing when it abdicated its judicial duty in that it failed to determine the issue raised by the Appellant to the effect that there was no criminal intention to commit any crime.
3. The trial Court misdirected itself in law and breached the Appellant?s right to fair hearing when it failed to consider the defences raised by the 2nd Accused person (Appellant) at the trial before convicting him.
4. The decision/judgment of the trial Court is unwarranted, unreasonable, perverse and cannot be sustained having regard to the evidence adduced at the trial Court.

The questions raised for the determination of this appeal by learned Appellant?s Counsel, two (2) questions in all are as follows:

(1) Whether the lower Court had abdicated its judicial responsibility and thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice in the circumstances of this case in that it failed to consider the evidence and the defense raised by the Appellant in his defence. (Ground 3)

(2) Whether from the totality of the

2

evidence adduced at the lower Court the Respondent had proved the offences of conspiracy and aiding contrary to Section 8(a) of the Advanced Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt. (Grounds 1, 2, and 4).

On the part of the Respondent, there is raised, what learned Respondent?s Counsel had referred to as a “Preliminary Objection” in which he had objected to issue number two (2) formulated by the Appellant in this Appeal. His ground of objection is simply that the word; “aiding” used in issue two (2) does not derive from the Ground of Appeal and that the Appellate Court cannot embark on the consideration of issues and arguments of which no complaint has been made in any Ground of Appeal. He cited the cases of N.D.I.C. v. F.M.B. (1997) 2 NWLR (Pt. 49) 735; EGBE v. YUSUF (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt. 245) 1 AT 11. He urged the Court to discountenance the issue altogether.

The purpose of a Notice of Preliminary Objection has been said for the umpteenth time, is to lead quickly to the termination or the dismissal of a matter in limine to avoid the dissipation of energy and also the waste of time