A Federal Excessive Court docket in Abuja on Wednesday dismissed the no-case submission by the suspended Dean of the College of Regulation on the College of Calabar, Prof. Cyril Ndifon, and his lawyer, Sunny Anyanwu.
The professor is at present standing trial on four amended counts of alleged sexual harassment and gratification, most well-liked in opposition to him by the Impartial Corrupt Practices and Different Associated Offences Fee.
His lawyer, Anyanwu, allegedly harassed the ICPC’s star witness.
On February 19, their lawyer, Joe Agi (SAN), filed a no-case submission urging the court docket to discharge and acquit them.
Also Read: Same Old Story – Usual story of agony
The duo contended that no proof was adduced by the prosecution on which the court docket might convict them, insisting that the fee failed to ascertain a prima facie case in opposition to them.
Particularly, the professor claimed that the collection of chats between him and TKJ, a diploma graduate, instructed a consensual relationship between them.
The professor famously noted that they conveyed their love, affection, and concern for one another’s security during the chats.
However, in opposition, the fee was filed as a counter affidavit on Feb. 23, praying the court docket would dismiss the appliance.
Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling, held that the prosecution’s proof constituted a prima facie case against the duo.
Due to this fact, Justice Omotosho ordered Ndifon, the suspended dean, and Anyanwu to enter their defence.
The choose mentioned that although the supply of the ICPC Act relied upon by Agi confirmed that FHC was not talked about as a court docket with jurisdiction over the Act, he mentioned that the court docket was sure by the choice of the Supreme Court docket within the case of Aweto Vs. FRN(2018) the place it cited provisions of the ICPC Act, 2000 and Part 251 of the 1999 Structure (as amended).
“The aim of the above choice is that the Federal Excessive Court docket has the requisite jurisdiction to entertain issues based mostly on the Corrupt Practices Act 2000.
“That is premised on the powers of the Federal Excessive Court docket beneath Part 251 of the 1999 Structure, vesting it with unique jurisdiction over civil and felony issues involving federal companies.
“The ICPC is a federal company; likewise, the first defendant is a public officer in a federal establishment. All these elements make this court docket a correct venue to attempt the offences,” he mentioned.
Regarding territorial jurisdiction, the choice disagreed with the defence counsel that the court docket was not the suitable venue for the trial since the reason for the motion arose in Cross River.
Citing Order 2 Guidelines 2 and three of the FHC (Civil Process) Guidelines, 2019, Justice Omotosho held {that a} swimsuit might be commenced in any judicial division of the FHC.
On whether the ICPC had powers to research and prosecute offences under the Cybercrimes Act 2015, he mentioned that the fee is a major federal regulation enforcement company with the mandate of investigating and prosecuting offences of corruption, fraud, bribery, and abuse of workplace by public officers, as defined by its Act under Part 47.
Justice Omotosho mentioned the proof up to now led by the prosecution reveals prima facie that the first defendant (Ndifon) solicited the nude images of PW2 (feminine diploma scholar) with the promise of giving her admission into the College of Regulation of the College of Calabar.
Also Read: Police beef up safety at Plateau meeting complicated
“PW1, who was one of many investigators, testified that examinations carried out on the cellphone of the Ist defendant reveal messages from 1st defendant to PW2 asking for these photos.”
The choice, nevertheless, mentioned that holding {that a} prima facie case has been established doesn’t essentially suggest that the court docket finds the defendants responsible for the cost.
“Consequently, this objection is overruled. Within the closing evaluation, the no-case submission of the defence is more likely to fail because the proof led by the prosecution constitutes a prima facie case in opposition to the defendants.
“Consequently, the no-case submission is overruled, and the defendants are ordered to enter their defence,” Justice Omotosho declared.
The matter was adjourned till March 12 for the defendants to enter a defence.
Omotosho additionally accepted Sen. Victor Ndoma-Egba and Okon Efut (SAN) as sureties for the bail earlier granted to Ndifon.
Ndoma-Egba represented Cross River Central Senatorial District within the Nationwide Meeting for 12 years.
Connect With Us: Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | Telegram
