Ruling in the case of unlawful arrest brought by Rickey Tarfa, SAN,
against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and three
others persons which was billed for today suffered a setback sequel to the
applicant’s attempt to introduce new evidence.
Tarfa had approach the court asking the court to award N2.5 billion as
damages against the EFCC over his arrest and detention.
At the last date in court, Justice Mohammed Idris of the Federal High
Court, Lagos adjourned to today February 29, 2016 for judgment after
listening to the submissions of counsel.
Tarfa had in an affidavit by one John Olusegun Odubela, who is the head of
Chambers in the firm of Messrs Rickey Tarfa & Co, admitted that the
applicant gave the sum of Two Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Naira Only
(N225,000) to Justice M.N Yunusa of the Federal High Court.
He has now approached the court for an order granting him leave to re-open
and adduce further evidence that the said Justice M. N. Yunusa is Mr.
Mohammed Awwal Yunusa, a former employee in Tarfa’s chambers, as the
beneficiary of the N225, 000.
Tarfa, SAN, had stated in his earlier affidavit ’’That it was a common
knowledge in legal circles that the Honourable Justice M.N Yunusa lost his
father in-law Alhaji Audi Garba Damasa on 28th December 2013 in Maiduguri
and travelled there to attend to the funeral rites.
“That the applicant and some friends of the Honourable Justice M.N Yunusa
made some donations towards the said funeral rites and to commiserate with
the Judge since they could not physically go and commiserate with him in
Maiduguri where he was and stayed for a while.
“That the contributed monies amounted to Two Hundred and Twenty Five
Thousand (N225,000) which sum was given to the applicant with the
responsibility to get same across to the bereaved judge.
“That the applicant consequently made arrangements to forward the sum of
N225,000.
“That I know as a fact that it is common in Nigeria for friends and
well-wishers to contribute gifts in cash and kind to people who are
celebrating or bereaved”.
Tarfa has now made a u-turn. “That the Applicant did not in paragraphs 35,
36, 37, 38, & 39 of the Applicant’s further affidavit deposed to on 19th
February, 2016 stated that the sum of N225,000 was paid to Honourable
Justice M. N. Yunusa of this Honourable Court.”… “That the sum of N225,000
was paid to the Applicant’s former staff, M. A. Yunusa Esq and it is
necessary to adduce further evidence by allowing the use of further and
better affidavit of Mr. Mohammed Awwal Yunusa in support of the
application for enforcement of fundamental rights who owns the account
that was said to have been owned by Honourable Justice M. N. Yunusa”,
In his counter affidavit the EFCC counsel, Wahab Shittu claims that the
grounds upon which the applicant was bringing the application is blatant
falsehood and an afterthought. He claims that the applicant’s further
affidavit that was deposed to earlier cannot be twisted or misrepresented
in any way whatsoever.
”That paragraph 10 of the affidavit in support stands logic on its heads
and in response thereto paragraphs 37 and 38 of the further affidavit of
the applicant showing clearly that the applicant averred that the sum of
N225,000 (Two hundred and twenty five Naira) was paid directly to
Honourable Justice M. N. Yunusa…He also stated that paragraph 11 of the
affidavit in support is blatant falsehood in that the cheque in the sum of
N225,000 annexed as exhibit E is the affidavit of one Mohammed Awwal
Yunusa dated 23rd Day of February, 2016 is in the name of Mohammed Awwal
and not Mohammed Awwal Yunusa.
Shittu claims that the applicant’s new position that this was not what he
said is a gross misrepresentation and an attempt to mislead the court.
Shittu also drew the court attention to the fact that Tarfa repeatedly
wrote that he was 43 years in all the pages of his extra-judicial
statement with the EFCC whereas A Compendium 3rd Edition of Senior
Advocates of Nigeria shows that Tarfa was born on February 23, 1962 making
him 54 years.
After listening to the arguments of the two parties Justice Idris
adjourned the matter to March 2, 2016 for ruling on the new application.