The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has acquitted and discharged former head of service Stephen Oronsaye of 22 count charge of fraud.
The court held that no credible evidence was presented by the 21 witnesses called by the EFCC.
Delivering Judgment Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the prosecution suppressed material evidence, by not informing the court that Abdulrasheed Maina, who was a defendant in the case and also an important figure in the suit was facing trial at another court and had been convicted.
The EFCC had said Mr Maina was at large but in a real sense was facing trial at the federal high court Abuja.
The court held that the 4th and 5th defendants who are corporate entities had already been wound up by orders of a court of competent jurisdiction and as such has no life before the court.
Winding up a company is a corporate penalty.
The prosecution ought not to have included them in the charge.
They were accordingly struck out.
The prosecution’s 1st, 2nd and 4th witnesses who were compliance officers with different banks, in their evidence in chief stated that there was no payment made to Mr Oronsaye or on his behalf of
The accounting officer for procurement entities is the permanent secretary, the prosecution has not said by Mr Oronsaya is been held for duties carried out by the permanent secretary.
Most of the witnesses brought by the EFCC were compromised witnesses
When the IPO of the case claimed to have spoken to some persons in cause of his investigation, it is important those persons are called as witnesses.
They argument that some of the witnesses facing trial is not sustainable.
When the IPO conducts an investigation it must be done thoroughly not seen as of the his just placing facts as he wishes.
When an allegation was placed on a person through a petition it is the law, that the person is averred with the petition.
Related posts:
Breaking: Court discharges, acquits Jide Omokore of $1.6bn fraud
Court discharges, acquits Jide Omokore of $1.6billion fraud
Spanish court acquits fmr Liverpool player Xabi Alonso of tax fraud
Court acquits Bala Mohammed’s Son On 11 Out Of 20 counts fraud charge
Breaking: Court acquits fmr Chief of Air Staff, Mohammed Umar of N66m fraud
Court acquits former chief of Air staff of 6 out of 7 corruption charges
Update: Court Convicts former Bank PHB MD, Francis Atuche, discharges wife
Civil Service Is The Engine Of Growth, Development – Former HOS
