Nigeria Content Online

A Federal High
Court, Abuja, on Wednesday, warned former officials of the Nigeria
Football Federation to avoid any actions capable of frustrating speedy
prosecution of a matter, brought before it by the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission.

The case, which has
been adjourned till February 25, is based on a charge challenging the
anti-graft agency over an application brought before it by four former
officials of the Football Federation seeking to quash charges of
corruption levelled against them by the agency.

Corruption charges

Sani Lulu Abdulahi,
Amanze Uchegbulam, Bolaji Ojo-Oba and Taiwo Ogunjobi, all former
officials of the Football Federation, are standing trial before Justice
Donatus Okorowa on a seven count charge bordering on corruptly using
their offices to confer unfair advantage on themselves, defrauding the
federal government to the tune of over N1.3 billion naira and $2
million (N300m) and also unlawfully issuing 1,263 tickets as
complementary offers to friends, associates, political support groups
and family relations.

When the matter
came up for hearing yesterday, Lulu, had, through his counsel Sunday
Ameh, applied for an extension of time to enable him file his written
addresses out of time.

Before he adjourned
the case, Okorowa said economic crimes are sensitive and ought to be
diligently and speedily prosecuted. Therefore, he said, the court will
not tolerate any attempt to delay the case and afterwards gave the
prosecutor four days to respond to the motion brought by the former
Football Federation boss seeking to quash the charges brought against
them by the anti-graft agency.

He also gave Lulu’s defence counsel four days to respond on point law to the reply of the prosecution.

Accused of misrepresenting Nigeria

The accused persons
were also alleged to have booked the Hampshire Hotel, South Africa, for
the Super Eagles regardless of the fact that it was cheap, substandard,
and unbefitting and an unlisted hotel among the approved list of hotels
by the Federation of International football Association, FIFA, for
lodging participating teams. The federal government had to pay $125,000
as fine for a breach of contract when it changed hotels subsequently.

Jurisdiction of the court

Ameh challenged the
jurisdiction of the court to entertain the charges brought against them
by the anti-graft agency, saying that it is only FIFA that has
jurisdiction to prosecute them. All other defence counsels agreed with
Ameh.

However,
prosecution counsel, Olasupo Ashaolu, at the resumed hearing of the
case, opposed the application with a 22-paragraph counter-affidavit
praying the court to reject the applications of all the defence
counsels, saying they lacked merit.

Ashaolu further
said the crime committed by the accused persons was committed in
Nigeria and as such, “coming to this court and saying they cannot be
tried by Nigerian laws, except FIFA, is an aberration”.

The prosecution
counsel also faulted the argument by the accused persons to the effect
that the agency did not seek and get the prosecutorial consent of the
Attorney General of the Federation, before commencing trial.

According to
Ashaolu, the agency did not need a fresh consent of the Attorney
General of the Federation to prosecute the case, as the agency has all
the powers and right conferred on it by the Establishment Act to
prosecute all economic and financial crimes.

Ashaolu also said
the approval of funds by the Federation officials were in itself, an
offence; “as there is a limit to which they can appropriate funds as
clearly indicated in the Procurement Act for contract approval”.

He submitted that the applications by the accused persons are meant
to delay trial. He therefore urged the court to discountenance the
applications in their entirety and allow trial to commence.