Alleged $6bn fraud: EFCC’s charge amendment, an overreach- Agunloye tells court

Former Minister of Power, Dr. Olu Agunloye, on Thursday told an Abuja High Court that the amendment of the charge by the EFCC in his ongoing trial was an overreach.

Agunloye is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in the suit, marked FCT/HC/CR/617/2023, on a seven-count.

He is charged with forgery, disobedience of presidential order, and corruption allegedly committed in the Mambulla power plant project.

The EFCC alleged that Agunloye, on May 22, 2003, awarded a contract titled “Construction of 3,960 megawatt Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Station on a Build, Operate, and Transfer basis to Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited without any budgetary provision, approval, or cash backing.

The commission also alleged that it traced some suspicious payments made by Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited to accounts of the former minister, who served in the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

The defendant, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge.

At the resumed hearing in the case while adopting his processes against the amendment of the charge by EFCC, Agunloye, through his counsel, Adeola Adedipe SAN, urged the court to dismiss the prosecution’s application for amendment.

Adedipe argued that no cogent and verifiable reasons have been adduced for such an amendment.

He submitted that Leno Adesanya, whose name was imported into the amended charge by virtue of the judgement of Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, had acquired a declarative right in realm.

According to him, that right was enforceable by the court by virtue of Section 287(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

The prosecution counsel, Abba Muhammed SAN, however, objected to this submission.

He asserted that the prosecution’s right to a fair hearing as guaranteed by Section 36 of the Constitution will be violated if the defendant’s oral submission is taken into account.

Earlier, Muhammad, while adopting the complainant’s processes, said that the Motion on Notice seeking to amend the charge against the former minister was brought pursuant to Sections 216(1) and (2) and 217 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.

He then urged the court to grant the prosecution’s prayers, seeking an order granting leave to amend the instant charge against the defendant.

He added an order seeing the amended charge filed on June 25 against the former minister properly filed and served.

Explaining how the amended charge is an overreach in his process, Adedipe argued that EFCC, through the amended charge, is trying to repair the admission by its first witness (PW1) that nothing is in Agunloye’s bank statement.

He added that disclosing the transfer or receipt of monies by him from Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited, which he described as "damaging,” to the prosecution.

Adedipe prayed the court to take note of the prosecution’s attempt to amend the charge.

"The prosecution will continue to amend at every instance evidence of its witnesses is demolished, thus making proceedings to be a hide and seek,” he said.

He submitted that in spite of Justice Ekwo’s judgement prohibiting the complainant from investigating or prosecuting anything relating to the Mambilla project, it still sought to “clandestinely infuse the name of Leno Adesanya in the charge and continue prosecution of this case.”.

On its part, EFCC, in one of its processes, submitted that it could, in an instance of such amendment by the prosecution, the court was required by law to take a fresh plea of the defendant.

EFCC further submitted that, going by the provisions of ACJA and the various authorities it cited to argue in favour of its application for amendment of the charge, the court had the power to grant the application as prayed.

Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie, after listening to their submissions, adjourned the case until Jan. 23 for a ruling.