Judge awaits instructions, puts Orji Kalu’s fraud trial on hold

Judge awaits instructions, puts Orji Kalu’s fraud trial on hold

Mohammed Idris, judge of the federal high court in Lagos, on Wednesday said the court will await further directives before proceeding with the trial o

$24,000 bribe: Sani rejects lie detector test, opts to swear with Quran
Abba Kyari takes bill to Buhari in London for signing
Experts advice to turn off air conditioners to reduce spread of COVID-19

Mohammed Idris, judge of the federal high court in Lagos, on Wednesday said the court will await further directives before proceeding with the trial of Orji Kalu, a former governor of Abia state. Kalu is on trial for the N7.2 billion fraud he allegedly committed while in office, between August 2001 and October 2005.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Orji Kalu alongside Ude Udeogo, his former commissioner for finance, and a company, Slok Nigeria Limited, for the alleged offences. On October 31, 2016, the EFCC preferred 34 charges against the accused. The charges were, however, amended and increased to 39 counts. Kalu and other accused persons had pleaded not guilty to the charges and were granted bail.

The trial judge, despite being elevated to the court of appeal, has been conducting the trial in the case, following a fiat authorising him to carry on. At the last adjourned date on November 12, 2018, Orji Kalu stayed away from the trial, after being absent a week, receiving medical treatment in Germany, according to his counsel. The court revoked his bail and ordered that at the point of his entry into the country, he must submit himself and all relevant travelling documents to the EFCC. The court had then adjourned the case until January 23.

On Wednesday, Rotimi Jacobs, the prosecutor, told the court that in spite of its order, the accused had refused to submit himself or his travelling documents to the EFCC. He argued that such attitude constituted a clear disregard for the court, and asked for the continuation of the trial of the accused even in his absence. The judge, however, said that although the case had been adjourned, the fiat issued by the presiding judge of the appellate court expired at the end of November 2018. The judge, therefore, said he had strong doubts if he should continue with proceedings without receiving further instructions. He noted that as soon he receives further directives, hearing notices would be served on counsel.