Kabiru Sokoto
• Ndume asks Appeal Court to upturn admission of evidence
By Tobi Soniyi in Abuja
The alleged mastermind of the 2011 Christmas Day bombing of St. Theresa's Catholic Church in Madala, Niger State, Mr. Kabiru Umar, also known as Kabiru Sokoto, was Wednesday brought before a Federal High in Abuja for arraignment on terrorism charges.
The alleged mastermind of the 2011 Christmas Day bombing of St. Theresa's Catholic Church in Madala, Niger State, Mr. Kabiru Umar, also known as Kabiru Sokoto, was Wednesday brought before a Federal High in Abuja for arraignment on terrorism charges.
The arraignment however could not to hold as the suspected terrorist
had no legal representation.
This is just as Senator Ali Ndume, who is facing terrorism related
charges, has applied to the Court of Appeal to stop his trial before a
Federal High Court.
Sokoto, who claimed not to understand the English language, spoke
through a court interpreter, stating he was not aware that he was being
brought to court.
He also informed the court that he had not been served with the charges
brought against him by the State Security Service (SSS).
He requested for a period of two weeks to enable him secure the services of a lawyer to represent him at the trial.
He requested for a period of two weeks to enable him secure the services of a lawyer to represent him at the trial.
The court presided over by Justice Adeniyi Ademola noted that the
nature of the case, being a terrorism related one, ought to be fast
tracked and expressed displeasure over the security agency's failure to
serve the suspect with the charges alongside the proof of evidence to
enable him prepare his defence.
Justice Ademola also declined an application made by the SSS' lawyer,
Ms. Chioma Onuegwu, wherein she pleaded with the court to allow Kabiru
enter his plea to signify the commencement of his trial.
The court thereafter adjourned proceedings until April 19 and ordered
that the suspected terrorist be remanded in the custody of the SSS.
The court also ordered the security agency to allow the suspect access to his lawyers to enable him prepare his defence and serve him every material document relating to the trial.
The court also ordered the security agency to allow the suspect access to his lawyers to enable him prepare his defence and serve him every material document relating to the trial.
Sokoto was charged with a three-count charge, including facilitating
the commission of a terrorist act by planting and encouraging his boys,
who are said to be at large, at Mabira Sokoto in Sokoto State, with the
intention to bomb the police headquarters in the state between 2007 and
2012.
The offence is contrary to Section 15(2) of the Economic and Financial
Crimes Commission Act, 2004.
He was also alleged to have been in possession of information about the
bombing of St. Theresa's Catholic Church on December 25, 2011, but
failed to disclose it to law enforcement officers within a reasonable
time to forestall the incident and thereby committed an offence contrary
to Section 7 (1) of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2013 and punishable
under Section 33 (1) of the same Act.
Lastly, Sokoto was alleged to have committed an act of terrorism at
Abaji, a suburb in the federal capital city, where he was said to have
trained 500 men and also incited them to commit terrorist acts.
Sokoto’s botched arraignment coincided with Ndume’s application to the
Court of Appeal in Abuja yesterday, seeking to stop his trial before a
Federal High Court.
In the application filed at the Court of Appeal by his lawyer, Rickey
Tarfa (SAN), the senator said the stay would enable the appellate court
determine his appeal challenging the admissibility of three DVDs which
allegedly contain a series of purported telephone conversations between
him and convicted Boko Haram spokesman Ali Konduga.
In the notice of appeal, Ndume said the trial judge, Justice Gabriel
Kolawole, ignored the provisions under Section 84 of the Evidence Act,
which require that a document produced by a computer should be
admissible after satisfying certain conditions.
According to him, the provisions under Section 84 of the Evidence Act
are mandatory and cannot be waived by the court.
He argued that the conditions stated above were not satisfied before the three DVDs were tendered and admitted in evidence.
He argued that the conditions stated above were not satisfied before the three DVDs were tendered and admitted in evidence.
He said: “Having held that the DVDs and CDRs sought to be tendered are
secondary evidence of documents prepared by a public officer in the
discharge of his duty, the only legally admissible evidence of the said
DVDs and CDRs are certified true copies thereof.”
He therefore asked the Appeal Court to set aside the decision of the
trial court admitting the DVDs as evidence.
Ndume was alleged to have failed to report the activities of the Boko
Haram sect to security agents even when he had knowledge of the sect's
nefarious activities.
He however denied the charges and was admitted to bail.
Justice Kolawole had adjourned the trial to May 6 to enable Ndume pursue his appeal challenging the legality of the telephone phone conversations admitted in evidence.
The Appeal Court is yet to fix a date for the hearing
Justice Kolawole had adjourned the trial to May 6 to enable Ndume pursue his appeal challenging the legality of the telephone phone conversations admitted in evidence.
No comments:
Post a Comment