Posted by By Emmanuel Badejo on
AGAIN, the suspected cross-border robbery kingpin, Alhaji Hammani Tidjani, was yesterday arraigned at a Lagos High Court on a one-count charge of receiving stolen property.
AGAIN, the suspected cross-border robbery kingpin, Alhaji Hammani Tidjani, was yesterday arraigned at a Lagos High Court on a one-count charge of receiving stolen property.
The offence was said to have been committed contrary to Section 427 of the Criminal Code Cap C17 Laws of Lagos State, 2003.
Tidjani's arraignment before Justice Cybil Nwaka came 42 days after Justice Joseph Oyewole of the Lagos High Court, Ikeja Division discharged the accused of one-count charge of receiving stolen property, a crime said to have been allegedly carried out in Benin Republic and not Nigeria.
Precisely, on December 20, 2004 when he was discharged, Oyewole did not however acquit him on the ground that the accused had cases pending against him at other courts in Nigeria.
His discharge then was sequel to an application brought and argued by his counsel, Dr. Tunji Abayomi, seeking the charges preferred against him to be quashed and that the court should decline jurisdiction.
While Oyewole then dismissed the state's application on the ground of no sufficient proof against the accused, the judge however upheld the prayers sought by the motion filed by the accused.
At a Lagos High Court yesterday, before the commencement of the proceedings, Tidjani was brought into the court premises by mobile policemen.
But both the state and the defence counsel complained of late notice given to them on the trial of the case.
One state counsel said that the state got to know about the suit while in court the penultimate day and found the matter listed on the court list.
The particulars of the offence read thus:
"Alhaji Hamani Tidjani on about the 25th day of September 2003 on Lagos Island in the Lagos Judicial Division did receive a Toyota Corolla car with registration No. CQ327LND property of George Igbinoba knowing same to have been stolen."
To prove this charge, three witnesses shall be called. They are George K.I. Iganota; Banjoko Oluwemimo and Sergeant Bassey Uket.
In what appeared as balanced legal contest, both parties came to court with four counsel each.
While Mrs. Omotola Rotimi; Mr. Dipo Akinrolabu; Mr. A.Y. Kentan; and Mrs. Yetunde A. Bola-Keji were for the state, Dr. Tunji Abayomi; Mr. Mohammed Arubayi; Mrs. Bukola Afolabi and Mr. Sunday Sofolahan represented Tidjani.
When the suit came up, Abayomi said he got a motion on before the court and was ready to argue it.
However, the state counsel said they were not aware of any motion and that the state had not been served.
The defence added that it made two attempts to effect service on the state, which service the state has not accepted.
"My lord, Mrs. Bukola Afolabi, one of us was at the Ministry of Justice last week Friday to effect the service but the ministry refused to accept service on the ground that there was no date fixed for the motion," the counsel said.
"Again this morning, we have attempted to serve the counsel from the ministry. Although, she initially accepted, she later returned it to us. And this is just a motion which bothers on the jurisdiction of this court. My lord, also I know that the law permits counsel to personally effect service on another counsel in some circumstances," Tidjani's lawyer said.
The court while commenting on Abayomi's submission noted that the matter was adjourned till yesterday for arraignment and not for any other motion to be heard.
Justice Nwaka said: "This matter was adjourned till today for arraignment with an order that an interpreter be provided for the accused person and I think we should go on with that. This however does not mean that we can still fix another date for the hearing of the motion. The court shall still go on to take the plea of the accused."
Having overruled Abayomi who earlier said that plea was not supposed to be taken first before his motion which argued on jurisdiction, the court then was confronted with the problem of getting an interpreter for the accused who, it was claimed, does not understand English Language.
However, one of the mobile policemen who came to court, Inspector Tijani Liman, interpreted to Tidjani the charge preferred against him to which he pleaded not guilty.
Immediately after this, another case filed by the state against Tidjani was called by the court registrar. But the lead counsel for the state, Mrs. Omotola Rotimi, informed the court that the state needed to amend the charge hence it sought a short adjournment in the circumstance.
Rotimi said the amendment was covered by Section 163 of the Criminal Procedure Laws of Lagos State.
Abayomi, who did not oppose the adjournment sought by the state, however, said that the same section referred to by Rotimi allowed for variations in charge(s) against an accused person.
But the defence counsel asked why the variation could not be affected immediately so that the matter could go on.
Replying, Rotimi said that she had only told the court the directive she was being given to which Abayomi said if it was a directive, the state should have since prepared the said amendment considering the intervals between the last adjourned date and now.
The court therefore adjourned to February 14, 2005 for the continuation of the matter.