Dr. Erastus B.O. Akingbola V. Federal Republic Of Nigeria & Anor. (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

KUMAI BAYANG AKAAHS, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is against the decision of the High Court of Lagos State delivered on 31st day of May, 2011, wherein the Court dismissed the appellant’s application and assumed jurisdiction to entertain the information by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in charge No.ID/148C/2011.

On the 5th of May, 2011, the 1st respondent filed an information at the Ikeja Division of the High Court of Lagos State in Charge No. ID/14BC/2011.

In the said information the appellant and the 2nd respondent were charged with several offences bordering on stealing and obtaining, money under false pretences under the Criminal Code of Lagos State. Before the appellant was arraigned and his plea taken in respect of the counts contained in the information the appellant filed an application dated 19th May, 2011 wherein he urged the court to inter alia decline jurisdiction to entertain the information and a further order of injunction restraining the 1st respondent from arraigning him. Written addresses were filed by counsel to the parties and oral submissions were also made at the hearing of the application on the 31st May, 2011. In his ruling the learned trial Judge dismissed the application and assumed jurisdiction to try the appellant.

Being dissatisfied with the Ruling the appellant filed a Notice of Appeal dated 10th June, 2011 which was subsequently amended by leave of this Court granted on 15th September, 2011 containing 11 grounds of appeal from which the appellant formulated the following 8 issues for determination:-

1. Whether the lower court was right when the learned trial Judge held that the 1st respondent is empowered to file an information and prosecute offences under the Criminal Code of Lagos State and that the information filed by the 1st respondent in that Court was competent (Grounds 1 and 3).
2. Whether it was proper for the learned trial Judge to raise the issue of conflict between the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State and the provisions of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act and resolve same suo motu? (Ground 2)
3. Whether the lower court was right when the learned trial Judge held that the fiat – exhibit EFCC 1, purportedly issued by the Attorney – general of Lagos State is valid notwithstanding same was not personally signed by the said Attorney General and that the Criminal Procedure Law pursuant to which it was issued had been repealed (Grounds 4 and 5).
4. Whether the lower court was right when the learned trial Judge held that there was no single fact in the affidavit filed in support of the appellant’s motion dated 19th May, 2011, which contested the convenience of the forum of the Court to try the information filed by the 1st respondent (Ground 6)
5. Whether the lower court was right when the learned trial Judge refused to give effect to the orders, made by the Federal High Court in favour of the appellant (Ground 7)
6. Whether the lower court was right when the learned trial Judge held that the proceedings before the said court did not amount to an abuse of court process? (Ground 8)
7. Whether the lower court was right when the learned trial Judge held that an officer of the 1st respondent was the proper person to certify the fiat – exhibit EFCC 1 and the same was valid and effective? (Ground 9)
8. Whether the ruling of the learned trial Judge was competent and not a violation of the appellant’s fundamental right to fair hearing when the trial judge heard lengthy and copious arguments from counsel and adjourned for fifteen minutes to deliver a ruling which was not in writing or was neither dated nor signed? (Ground 10 and 11)

On its part the 1st respondent raised 9 issues for determination. The Issues are:-

(i) Whether or not the information for the offences of stealing and obtaining by false pretence before the lower court is competent having being filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Ground 1 and 3)

(ii) Whether or not the issue of conflict between the Administration of Justice Law 2007 and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act was raised suo moto by the Lower court Ground 2.

(iii) Whether or not the letter dated 12 May, 2004 was for the purpose of prosecuting offenders under the Criminal Code law and whether or not the repeal of the Criminal Procedure law affected the said letter. Ground 4

(iv) Whether the letter, Exhibit EFCC 1, dated 12th may, 2004 from the Attorney General of Lagos State to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission signed by the Director of Public Prosecution was proper. Ground 5.

(v) Whether the lower court was right to hold that it had the jurisdiction to try the Appellant. Ground 6.

(vi) Whether or not the lower court was right when it held that in the circumstances of this case the arrest and detention of the Applicant had being completed and there is nothing the lower court can do that will affect the rights of the Appellant made in the judgment of the Federal High Court heavily relied on by the Appellant. Ground 7.

(vii) Whether the Appellant herein was able to establish before the lower court that the Information against him at the lower court constitute abuse of court process. Ground 8.

(viii) Whether the lower court was right when it held that Exhibit EFCC 1 which was in custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission was properly certified by an officer of the Commission. Ground 9.