Bankole, Nafada: EFCC appeals judgment

ABUJA — Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, yesterday, appealed against the decision of an Abuja High Court, which acquitted former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr Dimeji Bankole and his deputy, Alhaji Usman Nafada, from prosecution over alleged N40 billion loan scam.


EFCC in the appeal filed at the Court of Appeal, Abuja, is praying the appellate court to quash the lower court’s verdict and also remit the case back to the lower court for trial before a new judge.
EFCC in the appeal, is contending that the trial judge erred in law when he dismissed the 17-count criminal charge preferred against the ex-lawmakers on grounds that they have no case to answer in relation to the allegation of theft and breach of public trust levelled at them.

EFCC maintained that “evidence clearly shows that the accused person was present at meetings where it was collectively resolved to obtain loans and increase running costs. Without those resolutions, the accounts would not have been operated/accessed in the manner they were operated/accessed.
“Both in fact and in law, the offence of theft can be charged together with criminal breach of trust, contrary to the decision of the learned trial judge. All the ingredients of the offence of theft were proved by the prosecution.”

“The learned trial judge erred when he held that the accused person had no case to answer in respect of count 1 of the Charge which is in relation to conspiracy to commit criminal breach of trust.
“The prosecution established all the ingredients of conspiracy to commit the said offence. So long as the accused person had no authority to approve and increase ‘running cost’ and to obtain loans, then their resolution was an agreement to commit an act by illegal means.”

“The learned trial judge erred when he held that the accused person had no case to answer in respect of Count 12 of the Charge which is in relation to conspiracy to commit theft. The prosecution successfully established all the ingredients of the said offence.”

It urged the appellate court to allow the appeal and set aside the ruling of the lower court dated January 13, 2012, to the effect that Bankole has no case to answer, as well as an order remitting the case to the lower court for retrial before another judge. (Vanguard)