The Federal High Court sitting in Jos yesterday said allegations leveled against the leader of Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND), Mr. Henry Okah are too weighty and serious to be ignored.
The court said although a criminal case can be struck out, if it does not disclose a prima facie case against the accused person, it however over-ruled this, even though Okah’s counsel, Mr. Femi Falana had cited Supreme Court and Court of Appeal cases having semblance with the case at hand.
The trial judge, Mr. Justice Stephen Adah, had fixed yesterday to determine whether or not Okah had a case to answer. Falana together with Wilson Ajuwa said Sola Egbeyinka, had earlier submitted that the proof of evidence does not disclose any prima facie case against the accused to warrant him to stand trial before the court on the charges described in the charge list.
But Mr. Aminu Alihu, a legal practitioner from the Federal Ministry of Justice who stood in for Mr. Salihu Aliyu, the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), argued that the facts stated against Okah directly pointed at him as culpable in all the 62-count charge before the court.
Ruling on the submissions by Okah’s counsel, Adah held that a criminal case can be struck out if it does not disclose a prima facie case against the accused. The judge said the evidence before the court is strong enough for the trial of the accused to commence. He reiterated his earlier ruling by refusing the application for bail.
The DPP then applied that the plea of the accused be taken so that trial could commence, but Falana objected on the ground that as at the last adjourned date, court had directed the federal government to make necessary arrangements for the medial treatment of the accused person who was suffering from kidney complications.
At this juncture, Alihu submitted that from investigation so far carried out the accused was fit to stand the trial, adding that their doctor who conducted the investigation was in court to affirm that.
The judge then ordered the medical doctor to tell the court the health condition of the accused. The doctor, a general medical practitioner employed by the federal government, told the court that he had not identified any problem with the accused.
It was however gathered that an urologist had examined the accused on Thursday and recommended specialist review and a series of tests which would take sometimes to complete.
The DPP praised the judge for his brilliant ruling, but Falana on the other hand said the ruling has over-ruled both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal.
The case was adjourned to October 31 for hearing when the accused is expected to be better .
Oct42008