A legal battle between the Lagos State Government and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) prevented Chief Cletus Ibeto, the Chairman of Ibeto Energy Development Company, from being arraigned on Tuesday at the Lagos High Court in Ikeja over an alleged N4.8 billion fraud.
Lawyers for Ibeto, led by Nigerian Senior Advocate Uche Obi, have raised legal representation concerns following moves by the Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice to take over the prosecution of the case.
The EFCC, through its counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Rotimi Jacobs, described the move as “an attempt to scuttle the trial, which has just been adjourned the fourth time with the defendant failing to show up in court.”
Dr Jide Martins, the Lagos State Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), appeared in court on behalf of the Attorney-General, Lawal Pedro, following the resumption of proceedings.
Martins notified the court of a petition written by the law firm of another Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Robert Clarke, seeking a review of the case file and the outright takeover of the case by the office of the Attorney-General.
The DPP informed the court that despite the Ministry of Justice requesting the case file from the EFCC, the AG has not yet made a decision.
The defence counsel, Obi, then urged the court to adjourn the case until legal representation is resolved.
He said: “An issue of legal representation has just arisen in court this (Tuesday) morning. The leaned DPP has asked for an opportunity to reappraise the complaint of the complainant and the state has to be given a chance to take that decision. It appears to me that nothing else can be done today (Tuesday) but to allow for a reasonable time for the state to take a decision.’’.
Obi informed the court that the defendant is currently in the US for a life-threatening illness, tendering a doctor’s letter confirming this.
The letter written by Dr Darlington Udeh, MD of Brownsville Infectious Disease, PA, Texas US indicates that the defendant, Cletus Ibeto, is currently undergoing evaluation, procedure, and treatment because of complications arising from diabetes mellitus.
However, the EFCC counsel, Jacobs, in his reaction, pointed out to the judge that four different lawyers had been engaged by the defendant, allegedly in his efforts to scuttle the hearing of the case.
He also submitted that the Lagos State Attorney-General cannot take over the case as the main charges are based on Federal laws.
He said, “Section 211 limits the State AG to the takeover of state offences and this power cannot be extended to Section 174 which involves federal offences.
“The Attorney-General’s letter to this court was written without hearing from us and the purpose was to shield the defendant from appearing before this court and when he is seized on the whole matter, he would change his mind.’’
The counsel also informed the judge that following the bench warrant issued by the court, the EFCC visited the Ikoyi office of the defendant but could not apprehend him.
Jacob said, “We also visited his house up to three times before we heard that he sneaked out of the country. Then they reported the matter to the AGF who invited me to brief him on the facts of the case and after the briefing, he gave the EFCC the go-ahead to proceed.
“A petition against this case by another of the defendant’s lawyers, Ikpeazu dated 15th Nov. was also sent to the EFFC Chairman stating the ground of their preliminary objection which is before the court. The EFCC chairman was also briefed by the Investigating Police Officer (IPO) and myself, and after the review, he concluded that it was because of the bench warrant that the defendant did not want to appear before the court.
“By now 6 different eminent lawyers have been employed by the defendant, showing various steps to scuttle the hearing of this case.’’
Justice Ijelu clarified that the court’s primary function was to arraign the defendant, and the prosecutor’s bench warrant could not be enforced due to the defendant’s absence.
He also noted that the defence counsel had informed the court that the defendant was in the United States of America for a life-threatening ailment.
The Judge ruled: “Having considered all submissions made by the lawyers, the court is of the view that the issue of representation by the learned prosecutor on record and that of the AG is an issue and has to be resolved.’’
Justice Ijelu, therefore, adjourned the case to January 29, 2024, for the resolution of the defendant’s representation and prosecution.