The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the appeal initiated by the Lagos State Government to challenge the acquittal of Hamza Al-Mustapha in the case of the murder of Kudirat Abiola, wife of M.K.O Abiola believed to have won the historic 12 June 1993 presidential election.
Resting the legal case that has lingered in dockets across the Nigerian court hierarchies for over 25 years, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court threw out the appeal on grounds of abandonment by Lagos State Government.
|
|
Paul Daudu, a lawyer to Mr Al-Mustapha, who served as the chief security officer to the late Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha, told the panel of justices that the Lagos State Government had not taken any step to pursue the case after obtaining the Supreme Court’s approval to reopen the appeal in 2014.
Mr Daudu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, told the court that not even a notice of appeal had been filed by the Lagos State Government since 2014.
|
|
|
|---|
Worse still, the state government sent no representative to court for Thursday’s proceedings despite being served with hearing notice as far back as 2020, a development that incensed the Supreme Court panel on Thursday.
Kudirat killed
Kudirat was gunned down in Lagos on 4 June 1996, while her husband, M.K.O Abiola, was in detention ordered by the military dictator Mr Abacha in the heat of the crisis stemming from the 12 June 1993 presidential election. Her death shook the nation and gained global attention, rallying support for the pro-democracy movement in Nigeria.
The 1993 election, reputed to be, arguably, the most credible in Nigeria’s history was annulled by the regime of Ibrahim Babangida, setting off crises that saw him hurriedly handing over to an interim national government in August 1993. Mr Abacha took power in November 1993 by pushing aside the Ernest Sonekan-led interim national government.
Mr Abacha, who ruled Nigeria with iron fist, brutally suppressed pro-democracy campaigns for the restoration of Mr Abiola’s mandate which he was believed to have won in the 12 June 1993 presidential election. Mr Abiola would die in custody under controversial circumstances in July 1998.
Mr Abacha’s regime was blamed for a series of assassinations of pro-democracy figures, including Kudirat, campaigning for what was then known as the actualisation of June 12.
After the dictator’s death in June 1998, Mr Al-Mustapha and a host of other top figures of the Abacha regime, including the son of the late dictator, Mohammed Abacha, were arrested for some high-profile murders that took place under the regime.
Mr Al-Mustapha, accused of ordering and facilitating the killing of Kudirat, was charged by the Lagos State Government with the murder in 1999. He was charged alongside Lateef Sofolahan, described then as Kudirat’s personal assistant that allegedly leaked Kudirat’s itinerary to the regime’s killer squad. Mr Sofolahan would later deny ever serving as Kudirat’s aide. Mr Abacha’s son, Mohammed, also briefly stood trial for the murder but was discharged early in the case.
Conviction and death sentence
After about 13 years of trial, the Lagos State High Court, on 30 January 2012, convicted and sentenced Mr Al-Mustapha and Mr Sofolahan to death by hanging for Kudirat’s murder.
Trial judge Mojisola Dada, the accused persons were found culpable as charged and sentenced them to death by hanging.
But the Court of Appeal in Lagos overturned the conviction on 12 July 2013, acquitting Mr Al-Mustapha and his co-defendant, Lateef Shofolahan. The three member-panel of the Court of Appeal was headed by Amina Augie, with Rita Nosakhare Pemu and Fatimo Omoro Akinbami as members.
The Court of Appeal cited the contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecutions’ star witnesses – Barnabas Jabila, then sergeant and member of the Abacha regime’s Strike Force also known as Sergeant Rogers, and Abdul Mohammed, also known as Katako.
Mr Jabila (Sgt. Rogers) had earlier, in his written statement and oral testimony, confessed to firing the bullet which killed Kudirat, and Mr Mohammed had confessed to driving the car with which Kudirat was trailed to the point where she was shot.
However, both later denied under cross-examination participating in the killing. While Mr Jabila said he was never in Lagos on the day of the killing but was in the Presidential Villa, Mr Mohammed said he was in Azare, Bauchi State, on the day.
The Court of Appeal said the contradictions discredited the testimonies on which the prosecution built its case.
Lagos’ appeal journey
The Lagos State Government, which claimed to be displeased with the judgment of the Court of Appeal alleging miscarriage of justice in the decision, only took steps to challenge the verdict at the Supreme Court in 2014, long after the statutory period for filing such an appeal had lapsed.
To activate the appeal, the government needed to first obtain the Supreme Court’s leave to proceed.
It filed its proposed notice of appeal in 2014.
It had justified its lateness in filing the appeal on the grounds that it set up two legal teams to review the circumstances of the case and the verdict of the Court of Appeal.
The government said that it took a long time for the two legal teams to present their findings and recommended that an appeal case can be filed and sustained.
It claimed that it planned to raise its ground of appeal on arguable legal and factual issues, especially the question of whether there is any direct or circumstantial evidence establishing the guilt passed on Mr Al-Mustapha in the murder case.
It argued that the contradictions in the testimonies of its star witnesses were “immaterial” and ought not be the basis for overturning the judgment of the trial court.
The government claimed that the testimonies of the second prosecution witness, Mr Jabila, and the third prosecution witness, Mr Mohammed were “detailed, graphic and consistent” and were not “materially” discredited “even under cross-examination.”
It said that it would plead with the Supreme Court to uphold and restore the death sentence by hanging placed on Mr Al-Mustapha.
On 12 January 2017, the Supreme Court granted the government permission to file the proper appeal against the 12 July 2013 judgement of the Court of Appeal.
The then-Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Walter Onnoghen, who headed the five-member panel of the Supreme Court at the time, ordered the Lagos State Government to file its substantive notice of appeal within 30 days
The Lagos State Government’s application for leave was argued by Osunsanya Oluwayemisi, a senior state counsel in the Lagos State Ministry of Justice. The lawyer to Mr Al-Mustapha, Joseph Daudu, a SAN, did not oppose the application.
End of the road
The Supreme Court threw out the appeal on Thursday after Mr Al-Mustapha’s lawyer reported that the Lagos State Government appeared to have abandoned the case.
The lawyer, Pau Daudu, who represented the lead counsel, Joseph Daudu, informed the court that in 2014 when the order to re-open the trial was granted, Lagos was issued a 30 day ultimatum to file its notice of appeal.
READ ALSO: Jersey to repatriate over $9.5m Abacha loot to Nigeria
He explained that more than nine years later, nothing was done to comply with the order.
He therefore urged the Court to hold that the appellant had abandoned the case and should be dismissed in its entirety.
Ms Abba-Aji, who presided over the matter, sought to know if Lagos was served with hearing notice. The question was answered in the affirmative by the registrar of the court.
The justices, thereafter, in a unanimous decision agreed that Lagos had lost interest in the matter and consequently abandoned it.
Ms Aba-Aji held that nine years was long enough for the appellant to have filed notice of appeal and the brief of appeal in the matter.
Besides, the court expressed disgust that the state government failed to send any legal representative to the proceedings or any information to the court and the respondent despite being served with hearing notice since 2020.
Consequently, the matter marked SC/CR/45/2014 was dismissed.
Another matter by the Lagos governor marked SC/CR/6/2014 on the same trial was also dismissed on the same ground.
(NAN)
