MONEY LAUNDERING: EFCC AMENDS CHARGES AGAINST OCHEKPE, TWO OTHERS.

Mrs Ochekpe

MONEY LAUNDERING: EFCC AMENDS CHARGES AGAINST OCHEKPE, TWO OTHERS.

By Joseph A. Adudu

13^th Februray, 2018

Hearing continues tomorrow 14^th February, 2018 at the Federal High Court Jos division in the case between the Federal Government (Complainant) and Mrs Sarah Reng Ochekpe, Evang Leo Sunday Ditong and Raymond Dabo (Defendants)

Ochekpe and others were first arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on 22^nd of January, 2018 on issue based on money laundering and the matter was adjourned to today for definite hearing.

When the case with charge No FHC/J/141C/2017 was called today, prosecution counsel A.Y. Muntaka told the court that three witnesses from Lagos, Abuja and Benin were in court to give evidence. He however said that there was an amended charge before the court dated 9^th February, 2018 duly filed and served on parties involved in the matter on 12^th February, 2018 adding that the amendment was brought pursuant to section 216, 217 and 218 of the administrative of Criminal Justice Act and further urged the Court to accept the amended charge and caused it to be read out and proceed with the hearing in accordance with section 217(b) 218(a) of the Administration of criminal Justice Act.

The prayer was granted and the amended charges read out thus:

“That you, Sarah Reng Ochekpe, Evang. Leo Sunday Jitong and Raymond Dabo sometimes in March, 2015 at Jos, Plateau state of Nigeria within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court without going through the financial institution, did conspire amongst yourselves to accept cash payment of the sum of four hundred and fifty million naira (N450,000,000) from one Annet Olike Gyen, head of Operations Jos branch of Fidelity Bank Plc which sum exceeded the amount authorised by law and thereby committed an offence contrary to the provision of Section 18 (a), Section 16 (I), (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2012 (As amended) and punishable under Section 16(2) (b) of the same Act.

“That you, Sarah Reng Ochekpe, Evang, Leo Sunday Jitong and Raymond Dabo sometimes in March, 2015 at Jos, Plateau State of Nigeria within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, without going through the financial institution, did accept cash payment of the sum of Four Hundred and fifty Million Naira (N450,000.000) from one ANNET OLIJE GYEN, Head of Operations Jos branch of Fidelity Bank Plc which sum exceeded the amount authorised by law to be paid to an individual(s) and thereby committed an offence contrary to the provision of Section 1 (a), Section 16(1), (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012 (as Amended) and punishable under Section 14(2)(b) of the same Act.

“That you, Sarah Reng Ochekpe, Evang, Leo Sunday Jitong and Raymond Dabo sometimes in March, 2015 at Jos, Plateau State of Nigeria within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did retain the proceed of crime to the tune of Four Hundred and Fifty Million Naira (N450,000,000.00) from one Annet Olije Gyen, Head of Operations Jos Branch of Fidelity bank Plc after accepting same from the Banking Hall of Fidelity Bank Plc Jos branch and thereby committed an offence contrary to the provision of Section 1(a), Section 16(1), (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012 (as Amended) and punishable under section 16(2) (b) of the same act.”

The defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges. Defence counsel therefore, urged the court to order the continuation of the trial since the defendants pleaded not guilty to the amended charge.

Federal High Court Jos

However, Defence Counsel S. Olawole stated that the defendants were only served yesterday through their counsel and that it would be prejudicial on their part to go into trial. He added that questions that would be put to the witnesses during cross-examinations would be depended on the interaction with the defendants stressing that each of the charges was touched materially and substantially citing section 218 of the administration of Criminal Justice Act and urged the court for time to enable the defendants prepare for the charges.

Prosecution counsel however, held that section 218 cited by the defence counsel is not meant to be objective but subjective adding that the section is not a blanket licence given to the Defendants. He said that mere citing of the section was not enough without materials being placed before the Court.

On the Bail application, prosecution counsel urged the court to impose stiffer conditions for the defendants and order the Defence counsel to sign an undertaking that they will not frustrate the case.

In his ruling, Justice Musa Kurna said that the defendants have not behaved or acted in a manner that would warrant the court to give stiffer bail conditions. He then granted bail to the defendants and ordered that they deposited their International passports.