Headlines
Supreme Court verdict on Kalu: I’ve been vindicated – Ozekhome
BY KAZIE UKO
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Mike Ozekhome says the quashing of the conviction of former governor of Abia State, Orji Uzor Kalu, by the Supreme Court, is a vindication of his position on the superiority of the nation’s Constitution over the administration of criminal justice.
The Supreme Court on Friday nullified the December 5, 2019 judgement of Justice Mohammed Idris of the Federal High Court, Lagos, that convicted Kalu, a serving senator, and subsequently sentenced him to prison.
Kalu had been jailed 12 years for stealing N7.1 billion belonging to Abia State, while he was governor between 1999 and 2007, in a case brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC).
Appraising the apex court decision which also ordered a fresh trial of Kalu, Ozekhome declared that the judgement had vindicated his two-year struggle to prove that provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice System (ACJA) were inferior to the overriding powers of the Constitution.
“Some people talk politics. Others dwell on sentiments, fiction and propaganda. Most humbly, I talk law, based on facts. Cold, hard facts. History guides me. Posterity is the judge. Events always vindicate me. This has been the trajectory of my life. Almighty God, I thank you,” Ozekhome revelled.
READ: Supreme Court nullifies Orji Kalu’s imprisonment!
He said the Supreme Court has, with its judgement, reaffirmed that a Justice of the Court of Appeal cannot operate as a judge of the Federal High Court, which was a basis for a motion he brought before Justice Idris on September 25, 2018 on behalf of Kalu, asking the judge to recuse himself.
According to him, “On 25th September, 2018, I filed a motion before Justice Mohammed Idris, on behalf of Orji Uzor Kalu, prayerfully requesting the erudite Justice (Judge?) to recuse and disqualify himself from further trying Kalu, as he (Justice Idris), had been elevated to the Court of Appeal on 22nd June, 2018.
“The following day, 26th September, 2018, I argued the motion in proceedings that lasted for about 4 hours. The pith of my argument was that Justice Idris, having been elevated to the Court of Appeal, was no longer qualified to sit as a Judge of the Federal High Court, and was thus disqualified from trying Kalu.
“I contended that section 396 (7) of the ACJA which permits a High Court Judge elevated to the Court of Appeal to continue with and conclude a part heard matter was in gross conflict with the provisions of sections 1(1), 1(3), 238(2), 239, 240, 250(2) and 253 of the 1999 Constitution, and therefore liable to be struck down.
“I cited, inter alia, the earlier Supreme Court case of Ogbuanyinya & 5 Ors v. Obi Okudo (1979) 9 S.C 32.
“I therefore urged the court to remit the case file back to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, for reassignment to another Judge.”
READ: I look forward to re-joining my colleagues in the Senate – Orji Kalu
Ozekhome further narrated: “The learned trial Judge in a very brief ruling held that though my argument was ‘compelling and the issues raised recondite and paramount’, he would still go ahead and hear the case since the same issue had earlier been raised (albeit orally) and he had overruled same.
“He concluded that since his earlier ruling on the matter was already being challenged at the Court of Appeal, he would go on with the trial. He therefore adjourned the matter to the following day, 27th September, 2018, for hearing.
“On that 27th September, however, the court adjourned the ‘matter sine die, considering all the factors surrounding the case, fiat and the motion argued yesterday’.
“The case was therefore put in abeyance for a while, till the fiat earlier issued to the trial judge was again renewed. He thus continued with the trial and convicted Kalu, a judgment that has just been finally set aside by the apex court.”
He added: “For the records, I was not the Counsel who argued the appeals at the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, which had arisen from the trial judge’s earlier refusal to recuse himself based on an oral application. This was before my argument on 26th September, 2018, based on my fresh formal motion filed 25th September, 2018. I genuinely believe that justice has been finally served.”