COURT ORDERS GANDUJE, WIFE'S TRIAL TO CONTINUE DESPITE THEIR ABSENCE

Read Time:2 Minute, 8 Second

The trial of Abdullahi Ganduje, the chairman of the All Progressive Congress (APC), and other defendants charged with bribery and misappropriation will proceed despite their absence, according to a ruling by the Kano State High Court.

Ganduje, his spouse Hafsat Umar, Abubakar Bawuro, Umar Abdullahi Umar, Jibrilla Muhammad, Lamash Properties Limited, Safari Textiles Limited, and Lasage General Enterprises Limited are all accused of eight counts by the state administration. The accusations include misappropriation, bribery, and the diversion of billions of naira in public funds.

Justice Amina Adamu-Aliyu rejected the state government’s request for a bench warrant against the defendants in her ruling on Thursday.

“The trial of the defendants continues even in their absence,” she stated.

Previously, on June 5, the court had approved a substituted service order for Ganduje and the other defendants.

Adeola Adedipe (SAN), the prosecutor, told the court that the defendants had been served, and on June 6th, an affidavit of service was submitted.

He noted, “My lord, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, and 8th respondents are not in court nor represented, only the 6th respondent”.

Adedipe requested the court to enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of the absent defendants, citing section 278(1)(2) of the Kano State Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2019.

“The court should enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of the defendants who refused to answer the complaint in the charge,” Adedipe argued.

He also urged the court to issue a bench warrant of arrest pursuant to Section 388 of the Kano State ACJL, stressing, “The essence of an arrest warrant is for the sanctity and urgency of the court because an order has been made for the defendants to appear before it and they refused”.

However, counsel for the 6th respondent, Nureini Jimoh (SAN) contended that service had not been properly effected on his client.

“We filed a notice of preliminary objection on the competency of the entire charge. The court does not have constitutional power on any of the count charges,” Jimoh stated.

He also mentioned that an application for a stay of execution had been filed before the Court of Appeal, “restraining the prosecution from publishing any charges against the 6th respondent”.

Jimoh urged the court to dismiss the prosecution’s application for a warrant of arrest and to refrain from entering a plea of not guilty on behalf of the 6th respondent.

Justice Adamu-Aliyu has adjourned the case until October 23 and 24 for the hearing of the preliminary objection and the main charge.