Date Published: 07/30/09

N145m Fraud: EFCC docks Vice Chancellor, 2 Others

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on Thursday July 29,2009 arraigned the vice chancellor of Imo State University, Professor Innocent Chuka Okonkwo before a Federal High Court in Abuja on a 14 count charge of misappropriation of fund, criminal breach of trust and abuse of office.

The University don who was arraigned alongside Uchechi Adaeze Nwugo and Wilfred Uwakwe, the university bursar allegedly conspired among themselves to defraud the institution to the tune of N145 million.

In count one of the charges, the trio were said to have conspired among themselves to obtain N25 million under false pretences from former students of Imo State University and as such committed an offence punishable under Section 516A of the Criminal Code. The Professor was said to have appropriated and approved the sum of N12 million to furnish his lodge without any lawful authority in addition to appropriating and approving the sum of N1.5 million as personal monthly allowance without any lawful approval. The professor also approved the sum of N20 million for the purchase of six units of KIA cars without following lawful and due process and that he knowingly and blatantly declared that he had one bank account in his Assets Declaration Form which he knew was false and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 191 of the Criminal Code.

Soon after the charges were read to the accused persons, counsel to EFCC, Muhammad Mailumo, asked the court to adjourn the case till the court resumes from its vacation, noting that it would enable the Commission complete its investigation and begin the full trial of the case. However, counsel to the first accused, C. O. Achilike who stood in for Amechi Nwiwu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, objected to it and thereafter moved for oral application for bail, a move the presiding judge Mohammed Garba Umar rejected. “I would not grant oral application for bail,” the judge stated.

But Achilike pleaded with the judge citing litany of cases to support his argument. “I shall be relying strongly on the Court of Appeal decision on Abiola Vs FG 1995 and a recent Supreme Court decision Sulaiman and others Vs Commissioner of Police, Plateau State 2008”. He told the court that with the Supreme Court decision, the essence of bail is to ensure that the accused person is present for trial. He therefore pleaded with the judge to grant his client bail on liberal terms saying that the offence for which the accused person is being held was bailable, and that the accused person will be available for trial. He added that the accused person will not interfere with EFCC investigation as he had been granted bail by the Commission before the arraignment.

Ola Olanipekun, counsel to the 2 nd accused person, adopted the submission of the first accused counsel saying that the accused persons were constitutionally entitled to bail unless there were any other reasons to the contrary. “Since there are no reasons whatsoever to the contrary the accused persons should be granted bail. May I refer my lord to the presumption of innocence of an accused person until proven otherwise? Criminal trial is not a punishment,” he submitted.

On his part, counsel to the third accused person, Obi Nwakoro told the court that there was no proof of evidence attached to the charges and therefore asked the judge to admit the accused persons to bail.

In his response, Mailumo urged the court to discountenance the submissions of the defence counsel. “The judge’s discretion on bail is hinged on merit of every particular case. My lord, we must use the law as instrument of social engineering and the time to do it is now. We must use the law to fight this cankerworm of corruption in our society. To grant them bail is to impede investigation,” he submitted.

After hearing the submissions of the defence counsel and the response of the prosecuting counsel, Justice Mohammed Garba Umar adjourned to August 10 for ruling on the bail application while ordering that the accused persons be remanded in prison custody.