Court Declares Jurisdiction to Hear Case Against Emefiele

The claims against Godwin Emefiele, the former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, of accepting gratification, making corrupt demands, and gaining property through fraud have been transferred to the Lagos State Special Offenses Court in Ikeja.

In his decision on Wednesday, Justice Rahman Oshodi ruled that, based on a number of facts provided in the case file, the prosecution, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), had successfully established that the court had territorial jurisdiction to consider counts 8 through 20 of the 26-count charge brought against the former CBN Governor.

However, the court concurred with the Emefiele’s attorneys that counts 1 through 4 of the charge are unconstitutional since they are not supported by any Nigerian legislation currently in effect.

Emefiele was charged with 26 counts by the EFCC on April 8, 2024, including alleged abuse of office and improper allocation of $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion, respectively.

Counts 1 through 4 and counts 8 through 26 specifically mentioned the former CBN Governor. These counts dealt with allegations of abuse of office, which is punishable under Section 73 of the Criminal Law of Lagos 2011; accepting gratification, which is punishable under Section 8 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000; making corrupt demands, which is punishable under Section 10 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000; receiving property that was obtained fraudulently, which is punishable under Section 328 of the Criminal Law of Lagos 2011; and providing corrupt advantage, which is against Section 19 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Act 2000.

Read Also: NSCDC Detains 10 Suspects Over Alleged Vandalism and Rape in Bauchi

The allocation of foreign exchange without a bid is not described as an offense in any written legislation, according to Justice Oshodi’s opinion, even though points 1 through 4 pertain to the broad crime of abuse of office as defined by criminal law. The court rejected these counts as a result.

With respect to counts 8 through 26, the judge emphasized that the evidence was adequate to support the court’s territorial jurisdiction by adopting accepted legal principles.

However, Justice Oshodi made it clear that this decision only addresses the jurisdictional argument and ignores the veracity of the accusations made against Emefiele.

The challenge contesting the court’s territorial jurisdiction over counts 8 to 26 was later dismissed by Justice Rahman Oshodi, who stated that the prosecution had shown a strong enough territorial connection to force Emefiele to respond to the allegations.

The trial has been postponed by the court to February 24 and 26.