Air Vice Mashal (AVM) Alkali Mamu’s counsel, Mr Joesph Daudu (SAN), on Monday objected to the appearance of a witness brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
AVM Mamu, a former Air Officer Training Commander and member of the Committee for Procurement in the Ministry of Defence, was arraigned on June 21 before Justice Salisu Garba on a three-count charge of bribery.
The EFCC had alleged that Mawu collected a cash gift of N5.9 million for the purchase of a Range Rover Evoque.
He also allegedly received two vehicles (Ford Expedition SUV and Jaguar XF Saloon) valued at N15 million and N12 million respectively from Societe D’ Equipments Internationaux Nigeria Limited, a contractor with the Nigerian Air Force
At the resumed hearing on Monday, Mr Olabode Farinuola, an employee of Zenith Bank Plc, was subpoenaed by EFCC to tender documents in evidence on the matter.
Daudu told the court that he had raised an objection to the witness at the last sitting on the ground that his statement was not served the defence.
He cited Section 379 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 in his defence.
He also said that the essence of service was to enable them to prepare adequately in advance.
Daudu said that the prosecution should not have sole access to the evidence it brought before the court.
“Withholding such evidence amounts to a breach of the defendant’s right which is provided for in section 36(6) (b) of the 1999 constitution, as amended.
“Once a witness is coming to testify, we must be provided with the evidence to enable us have the background of his testimony,” Mamu’s counsel said.
In his response, Mr Sylvester Tahir, the prosecuting counsel, said that the objection lacked merit and urged the court to discountenance it.
He said that the provision of Section 379 of the ACJA avails the defence with all that was required going by the charges filed in May.
He submitted further that the charge was accompanied by the relevant documents that the prosecution intended to use during trial.
“The witness in the box did introduce himself as a staff of Zenith Bank; attached also is the letter from the bank in response to a specific request by the EFCC.
“The witness, being a staff of the bank, does not need any further statement other than the one from the bank.
“Sections 241 of the ACJA empowers both the prosecution and the defence to issue a summons which has been duly served, not just to give evidence but issue documents,” Tahir said.
Daudu again objected, saying the prosecution did not understand the objection.
“It is about giving adequate information and the prosecution did not say anything which overrides Sections 36 (6) b of the constitution.
“EFCC should not feel they are above the law,” he said.
Justice Garba after hearing submissions of both counsel, adjourned ruling on the objection till Dec. 14. (NAN)