Alleged fraud: Lawyers to Maina, co-defendant shun court proceeding

The counsel to Abdulrasheed Maina, former Chairperson of the defunct Pension Reformed Task Team (PRTT) and his firm, the second defendant in the money laundering trial, on Monday, abandoned court proceeding.
Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja, where Mr Maina is facing a 12-count charge, made the remark in his ruling on Tuesday.

The EFCC had, on Oct. 25, charged Mr Maina (1st defendant) before the court alongside his firm, Common Input Property and Investment Ltd on money laundering offences.

He had, however, pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

Mr Abang, had, on Monday, adjourned trial continuation shortly after the court ordered Ali Ndume, who stood as surety for Mr Maina, to be remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre over his inability to produce the 1st defendant to stand his trial.

The court also ordered that the trial should continue in Mr Maina’s absence.

It would be recalled that since the commencement of the case, some lawyers, including Joe Gadzama, SAN; Ahmed Raji, SAN; Afam Osigwe; Adeola Adedipe; Mark Agbo and Francis Oronsaye had argued Mr Maina and his company’s case.

Although Mr Oronsaye appeared for Mr Maina yesterday, no lawyer appeared for the 2nd defendant (his firm).

At the resumed hearing on Tuesday, when the court registrar called the case, no counsel represented either Mr Maina or his firm.

The EFCC’s Lawyer, Mohammed Abubakar, was, however, in court.

Mr Abubakar informed the court that the matter was adjourned until today (Nov. 24) for further cross-examination of the 6th prosecution witness( PW6) by the counsel to 1st defendant (Maina).

He said the lawyer was yet to conclude his cross-examination and no excuse was offered for his absence.

“I, therefore, urge my lord to foreclose further cross-examination by counsel to 1st defendant,” he said.

On counsel to the 2nd defendant, Mr Abubakar said the lawyer must have abandoned the cross-examination of the PW6 because he had not been appearing for the sittings since July 20.

In his ruling, the judge noted that counsel to 1st defendant (Maina) crossed examined the PW6 on July 2 before the matter was adjourned for further cross-examination of the witness.

He said since then till Nov. 24, the counsel that cross-examined the witness abandoned proceedings.

The judge, therefore. ordered the closure of further cross-examination of PW6 by counsel to Mr Maina.

According to him, because he commenced cross-examination, the matter is not foreclosed but rather closed.

Also, the judge said counsel to the 2nd defendant ought to have been in court on July 20 to know when the matter was adjourned to.

He said the lawyer was not in court on Sept. 29, Sept. 30, Oct 2, Oct19, Nov. 18 and Nov. 23 of the adjourned dates and offered no excuse for his absence.

“It was further adjourned till today for continuation of trial.

“Learned counsel is not in court and offered no excuse for being absent,” he said.

According to him, it is my view that he has abandoned proceedings and will have himself to blame.

Mr Abang then granted the EFCC’s prayer to foreclose the cross-examination of the PW6 by counsel to 2nd defendant.

The judge, who discharged the PW6 from the witness box, ordered the prosecution to call the next witness.

Two witnesses; one Ali Sani, an Estate Developer in Abuja (PW7) and Ibrahim Abdulkareem, a federal civil servant (PW8), gave their evidence-in-chief before the court.

The EFCC’s lawyer urged the court to foreclose the rights of counsel to 1st and 2nd defendants to cross-examine the witnesses and it was granted.

Mr Abang then adjourned the matter until Nov. 25, for the continuation of trial.

.(NAN)