Attorney General Takes Over Prosecution Of National Theatre Directors Over Bribery
The office of the Attorney General of the Federation on Monday took over the prosecution of five directors of the National Art Theatre, Iganmu, Lagos accused of allegedly receiving the sum of N500, 000 each, from a contractor.
A legal officer from the Federal Ministry of Justice, Aminu Alilu disclosed the development before the Federal High Court in Lagos where the directors are facing a two-count charge of violating the Code of Conduct Act.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday fixed June 13 for the arraignment of five directors of the National Theatre for allegedly receiving N500,000 each from a government contractor.
Those charge before the court: a former Acting General Manager, George Ntanta; the Director of Business Development and Events Management, Abiodun Abe; the Director of Engineering and Technology, Ndubuisi Nwogu; the Director of Planning, Research and Strategies, Doris Okafor and Femi Joel.
The five accused persons, according to the charge marked FHC/L/282c/18, were alleged to have on January 16, 2017, obtained the sum of N500, 000, from a commercial firm, Market Execution Solution Limited, which has a contract with the federal government of Nigeria, in the course of discharging their duty.
The offence is contrary to Section 10(1) & (2) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, and punishable under section 1(2) & and 10(1)(a) of the Recovery of the Public Property (Special Provisions) Act.
They were originally charged by the Special Presidential Panel for the Recovery of Public Property (SPPRPP), but at the resumed hearing of the case on Monday, Alilu told the court that he had directives from the AGF to take over and continue with the prosecution of the case.
According to the lawyer, by the provisions of sections 174 (1)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the AGF reserves the right to take over, continue or discontinue any criminal charge.
He, therefore, urged the court to so hold.
However, Dr. Celsius Ukpong, who represented the SPPRPP told the court to discountenance Alilu’s appearance.
Ukpong told the court that he did not believe that there is any AGF’s instruction, he described Alilu’s appearance as an ambush.
He said: “we are in the same office, he knows where to get us, they have all the time to inform us officially, we are not private counsel, if they have special interest in this matter, they should let us know.
“I filed this charge, as a staff of SPPRPP, created under section 1(1) of the Recovery of Public Properties Special Provisions Act, 2004, and I filed this charge for the AGF”.
Ukpong said “we don’t have issues about the power of the AGF to take over this matter or any matter whatsoever, he (the AGF) has power to do so but due process must be followed.
“Anybody can’t just jump up and say, am representing the AGF. We are in the same office, they have to write us and ask for the case file. It is not for the counsel to come to Court. I asked that the defendants be arraigned, and subsequently, the AGF can do the necessary thing and take over the case”.
In his ruling, Justice, Muslim Hassan, upheld the submissions of Alilu and held that by the provisions of the constitution, the AGF possessed the power to take over criminal proceedings and “is not legally bound to explain the reasons for the takeover.”
Reiterating the provisions of sections 174 of the constitution, Mr Hassan held that the AGF’s power of take-over can be exercised by him personally or by any of his officers.
The court consequently held that, Alilu is an officer of the AGF and he can validly take over the case.”
The court, however, adjourned the case until June 13 for the arraignment of the accused persons.
