Charge against defendants adjourned following issues of service

The hearing of a suit filed by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) against Victor Ukutt, Whoba Ugwunna Ogo (who is reportedly at large), and two others was delayed on Monday due to the failure to serve the amended charge on some defendants.

The suit involves allegations of the conversion of approximately N32 billion belonging to Woobs Resources Limited.

At the hearing on Monday, ETC Emezina appeared for the prosecution, while Femi Falana SAN represented the 1st and 4th defendants, and Ayodele Akintunde SAN appeared for the 2nd and 3rd defendants.

The prosecutor, Emezina, informed the court that the prosecution had filed an amended charge, and all defendants had been served.

However, Falana SAN, representing the 1st and 4th defendants, stated that his clients have not been served with the amended charge.

Falana requested additional time to respond to the new charge and sought a brief adjournment to allow time for his response.

In a turn of events, the prosecution announced its willingness to abandon the amended charge and proceed with the original charge to expedite the hearing of the case.

However, Falana argued that only the AGF has the authority to amend the charge under Section 174 of the Constitution, and no counsel can take such action without first consulting the AGF.

Emezina responded, asserting that she had the AGF’s authority to amend and withdraw charges under Section 174(2) of the Constitution.

Justice Ambrose Alagua, the trial judge, instructed the prosecution to exercise patience and allow the defendants time to respond to the amended charge.

The case was adjourned until May 21 for the hearing of pending applications.

The Federal Government had filed an eight-count charge against the defendants for alleged conspiracy, conversion, obtaining by false pretenses, forgery, fraud, and money laundering.

They were accused of conspiring between 2011 and 2023 to convert approximately N32 billion from Woobs Resources Limited's account, which is domiciled with Fidelity Bank PLC.

The government claims the funds were unlawfully obtained through theft and fraud.

The alleged offenses are said to violate several sections of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended).

The defendants, in applications filed under Section 305(1)(A) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, and Sections 6(A) & (B) and 295 of the Constitution, seek the dismissal of the charge for lack of jurisdiction and abuse of process.

They are also seeking a stay of proceedings pending the resolution of a dispute over the ownership of shares in Woobs Resources Limited, currently before the Court of Appeal in Suit No. CA/L/343/2020.

The defendants argued that the charges stem from a dispute regarding the ownership of shares in Woobs Resources Limited, which arose from a Joint Venture Agreement involving the 4th defendant and nominal complainant, Mr. James Onyemenam.

This ownership dispute was originally brought before the Federal High Court in 2011 in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1232/2011.

The alleged offenses are in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, the Advanced Fee Fraud and Other Related Offenses Act, and the Cybercrimes Prohibition and Prevention Act, 2024.