Two lawyers defending Ibrahim Suleiman, who is accused of stealing N400 million belonging to First Inland Bank, on Wednesday withdrew from the case when the court insisted on docking the accused.
The duo had claimed that Suleiman was hit by a health condition that had made him mentally unstable, and presented medical documents indicating that he needed up to six months to “possibly” recover and be mentally fit to be docked.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the lawyers – Uche Mgbemena and Samuel Oguntuyi – are defending Suleiman at the Federal High Court II, Jos.
The duo took over Suleiman’s defence after his first counsel, Solomon Umon (SAN) withdrew on April 25, 2017.
The accused, who was arraigned before Justice Ayo Emmanuel, in 2011, is said to have hacked into the system of the defunct First Inland Bank plc, in June 2007, and stole N400 million.
Suleiman, who was arraigned by the EFCC, is facing a seven-count charge bordering on money laundering contrary to Money Laundering Prohibition Act of 2004.
When the case came up for hearing on Wednesday, the counsels had told the court that the health condition of the accused had become critical following an attack on him by some hoodlums in December 2017.
They argued that he (Suleiman) had an injury on his head which had affected his memory and speech.
“His (Suleiman)’s speech is not coherent and clear. He should not be subjected to further trial,” they argued.
They presented a medical report as evidences, while Dr. Shilong Danaan, a neuro-surgeon from Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH), was brought to the dock to confirm Suleiman’s condition.
The defense counsels then applied for an adjournment to enable the accused recuperate in accordance with the doctor’s medical advice which indicated that he needed six months observation period.
They also said that the accused person’s memory recovery chances were “50–50”.
Aside Suleiman’s health condition, the lawyers also wanted the Judge’s nod to subpoena an EFCC official, one Sabo Jero, to testify, before they would close their defence.
But the Prosecuting Counsel, Mr Chris Ugwu, opposed the applications, claiming that the defence counsels were not serious with the case.
He urged the court to close their defence so as to give way for the taking of written addresses to quicken the conclusion of the seven-year-old case.
“My Lord, we don’t think the defense counsels are serious with the case; for them to start talking of medical condition of the accused and asking for an adjournment after we all agreed to use the whole of this week to listen to their defence is strange.
“We oppose the application for adjournment because it lacks any positive direction.
“My Lord, in the absence of any defense witness, we apply that the court should close the case of the defence, considering the length of time this case has taken,” Ugwu argued.
The defence counsels, however, stood their ground, insisting that at their pre-trial interview with their client, the accused revealed that he could not give any rational answer to questions put to him due to his state of health.
“Putting him in the dock to give evidence in a matter of this magnitude will do a disservice to our calling and the services we have been called to deliver.
“We want the court to be mindful and consider giving us more time so that Suleiman can recuperate and be mentally stable.
“But, if the court thinks otherwise, and is insisting on docking the accused, we shall be applying to withdraw our services to the accused because our service is to do with conscience,” Oguntusi, one of the counsels, stated.
The EFCC counsel, however, opposed the application, stating that it was merely a rhetoric.
He urged the court to reject the application and close the defence of the defendants so that both parties could present their written addresses toward ending the case.
Justice Emmanuel, in his ruling, refused the defendants’ application and asked them to proceed with their defence by taking the accused person’s testimony without further delay.
“I hereby refuse the applications made by the counsels and direct that the testimony of the accused be taken now,’’ he ruled.
It was at this stage that the defense counsels threw in the towel and withdrew their defence for the accused.
The counsels quickly packed their belongings and walked out of the court.
Shocked by their action, the Judge asked the accused what he intended to, to which Suleiman, who scarcely found his words, pleaded with the court for more time to enable him get another lawyer.
But the prosecuting counsel objected to the application and asked the court to close the defence to give room for presentation of written addresses.
The Judge, in his ruling, closed the defence and adjourned the case to June 29, 2018 for the taking of final written addresses of both parties in the case. (NAN)