After a long drawn legal fireworks that lasted about eight years, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, Wednesday, fixed March 7, 2018, to deliver judgment on terrorism charges leveled against Charles Okah, the alleged mastermind of October 1, 2010, bomb blast at Eagle Square, Abuja.
Justice Gabriel Kolawole arrived at the date after Alex Izinyon (SAN), prosecuting the case for the Federal Government and defence lawyers, Emeka Okoafor and Ognenovo Otemu, for the first and second defendant (Nwabueze Obi), closed their case after adopting their written addresses.
Charles Okah is the younger brother to ex-leader of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), Henry Okah, who is serving life sentence in South Africa prison.
Okah, Obi, Edmund Ebiware and Tiemkemfa Francis-Osvwo (aka General Gbokos) were first arraigned before the court on Dec. 7, 2010 over their alleged involvement in the Independence Day blast.
Okoafor, Okah’s counsel in his address filed on January 16, 2018, urged the court to discharge and acquit Okah, on the ground that the prosecution has failed to link him with the alleged offence.
In his own submissions, Otemu said the prosecution did not put anything before the court to warrant his client (Obi) to have been put through trial.
While urging the court to set him free, Otemu said his client made several extra-judicial statements voluntarily and that the first of such statements was the one he made at the headquarters of the Department of State Services (DSS) on October 2010, which the prosecution refused to place before the court.
This, he said amounted to concealment of evidence, which he pointed out is against the law and therefore urged the court to hold that the document is favourable to the defendant, which was the reason the prosecution refused to tender it before the court.
“It is trite in law that once there is concealment of evidence it is taken that it will be in favourable of the defendant. It is the duty of all to lay every evidence before the court whether favorable or unfavourable, “Otemu submitted.
On the evidence of a prosecution witness, Otemu said:”They brought PW 9 to give evidence that the second defendant brought madza car to Abuja for the blast and left Abuja the following day. The witness said he was not the only person who saw the second defendant but Vivien Nwabueze, sister to the second defendant also saw him. This is only the second person who would have given guinue evidence, but said no it was not true, that she did not see the second defendant in Abuja. This created doubt.
“All prosecution witnesses contradicted themselves, some even forget they travelled abroad or had cases in Jos because they were prepared before hand to lie against the second defendant.
“The contradictions should be resolved in favour of my client,” Otemu submitted
However, Izinyon countered their submissions, saying the prosecution has proved its case against Okah on count one and eight and others to warrant conviction and sentencing
“He should be convicted as charged and sentenced accordingly, ” he held.
“The first defendant is a schemer and facilitator of act of terrorism. He is neck, head, toe deep in the matter. His evidence is riddled with material contradictions”
Izinyon asserted that the prosecution was also able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt on count one, five, six and seven against the second defendant.
“This noble court is called upon to convict the second defendant, his case is narrow because of his confessional statements that were admitted in evidence after trial-within-trial. The statement is direct, positive and conveyed the element of offence the second defendant is charged with,” he said
Consequent upon the adoption of the written addresses, the court adjourned till March 7 for judgment.
Felix Omohomhion, Abuja
