Alleged N900m fraud: ICPC rejects plea bargain by ex-JAMB registrar Ojerinde

 

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) will, on July 6, arraign Prof. Dibu Ojerinde, former Registrar, Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), at the Federal High Court, Abuja, for alleged N900 million fraud.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu fixed the date on Monday, after counsel to the ICPC, Ebenezer Shogunle, disagreed with the terms of the plea bargain application the defence counsel, P.A.O. Olorunnisola, SAN, had planned to file before the court.

RELIABLESOURCENG.COM reports that the operatives of the anti-corruption commission had, on March 15, arrested Ojerinde, in Abuja, on allegations bordering on misappropriation of funds.

The commission said that the former chief executive officer allegedly committed multiple frauds, while heading JAMB and the National Examination Council (NECO).

Ojerinde is the sole defendant in the suit, number CR/97/21, filed before the court.

READ: JAMB ex-Registrar Dibu Ojerinde arrested over N900m fraud

When the matter was called for arraignment, counsel to the defendant, Olorunnisola, told the court that arrangements were being made for a plea bargain.

A plea bargain is defined as an agreement in a criminal case between the prosecutor and the defendant where the prosecutor convinces the defendant to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to the original charge with a recommendation of a lighter sentence. It allows the defendant to skip the lengthy process of a court trial and to avoid being convicted of the possible stronger charge.

According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), Shogunle, who had already been served with a copy of the process, disagreed with Olorunnisola’s submission, saying the commission was not in agreement with the terms in the application.

Citing an authority to back his submission, Olorunnisola argued that the application for a plea bargain before arraignment was in conformity with the provisions of the law.

Justice Egwuatu held that since the prosecution was not in agreement with the terms put forward by the defence, a written correspondence should be filed to the effect.

The judge then adjourned the matter until July 6 for arraignment.