Missing Bayelsa N6.4bn: Court dismisses Sylva's application to quash charge
Trial judge, Justice Adamu Bello, in his ruling, also turned down his prayer for permission to be allowed to accompany his wife on a foreign trip.
Bello, in two separate rulings, dismissed the two motions for lacking in merit.
The judge said "I have perused the application filed by the applicant and evaluated the arguments thereof and discovered that it lacked merit.
"The court is not inclined to allow the applicant to embark on a foreign trip as such permission may jeopardise the trial, both motions are hereby dismissed.’’
Bello also held that it was premature for Sylva to insinuate that the charge was frivolous and that there was no evidence linking him with the alleged offences.
He relied on the Court of Appeal decision in the case of Alamieyeseigha vs the Federal Government reported in 2006, 16 NWLR part 1004, among other cases, to dismiss the two motions.
Citing the distinction between the conduct of summary trial by the Federal High Court and the trial by information as done by the State High Court, Bello said the court’s procedure did not give room for the quashing of charges.
He noted that ``under the summary trial, the question of whether the proof of evidence is sufficient can only be determined after the prosecution has closed the case’’.
``And if a no-case submission is made by the defence, it is then at the discretion of the court to decide whether or not a prima facie case is established or not.’’
The Federal High Court judge held that the summary trial procedure used in the case was constitutional, adding: ``the applicant by his motion, employed unconstitutional means to prevent the prosecution from proving its case against him.’’
In refusing the other motion seeking a leave to obtain a permission to travel abroad, the judge said that there were a number of conflicting information in the exhibits tendered by Sylva in that regard.
He said the letter referring the wife of the applicant to Cromwell Hospital, London, for treatment was written by a Nigerian doctor at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital.
He added that there was no response by the London Hospital to the Nigerian doctor as a proof of acceptance.
The judge noted that the purported referral letter was written six days after Sylva's last encounter with the EFCC.
He said that seeking a rescheduled treatment date, as reflected in the exhibits tendered by the applicant, betrayed the impression earlier created that there was urgency in the whole exercise.
Bello, however, held that the observed conflicting information were insufficient to sway the court into granting the applicant's motion.
Nevertheless, Bello said, the motion would only be denied on the grounds that Sylva was still being investigated by the EFCC.
He consequently threw out the motion and advised the applicant to make an alternative arrangement to have a relative to accompany his wife on the trip.
He, therefore, adjourned the matter to July 8 for definite hearing.
Sylva had in the first motion urged the court to quash the six-count charge against him on the grounds that there was no evidence linking him with the alleged offences.
He further said that the proof of evidence did not disclose a prima facie case against him.
According to Sylva, the charge is frivolous, unconstitutional and amounts to an abuse of court process.
The ex-governor had in the second motion sought the court’s leave to accompany his wife on a medical trip abroad.
He said his wife was due for an urgent surgery in a London hospital and therefore needed his company.
Sylva is standing trial for the alleged mismanagement of N6.4 billion state fund.
Comments
Post a Comment