Justice I.O. Ijelu of the Lagos State
High Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, on Friday, November 3, 2023, issued a bench
warrant for the arrest of a businessman;
Chief Cletus Ibeto, for failing
to appear in court for his arraignment over an alleged N4.8bn fraud.
Chief Cletus Ibeto
The Judge had, on October 5, 2023, adjourned till November 3,
2023, the arraignment of Ibeto alongside
Ibeto Energy Development Company and Odoh Holdings on 10-count charges bordering on obtaining by
false pretences, fraudulent conversion of property, criminal breach of trust,
forgery and deception, following an application and appeal by his lawyer,
Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN.
Ikpeazu, while seeking an
adjournment, had told the court that “the law is not a respecter of any person.
I am of the firm view that this is a matter that can be resolved; and if given
some time, it can be resolved.” The defence
counsel further told the court that he had no medical report with him, in
court, to explain the absence of the defendant, adding that the issue at stake
was one that could be resolved between the complainant and the defendants.
Responding, prosecution counsel,
Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, said though plea bargain was encouraged even in criminal
matters, “the EFCC gave them the opportunity to go and resolve their
differences, but they did not seize the opportunity, even before the charges
were filed. "There should be an arraignment first before the court will
assume jurisdiction to do anything”, he said.
After listening to both parties,
Justice Ijelu, at the last sitting,
expressed concerns that the defence counsel seemed to be trying to
deceive the court. The Judge held that defendant could not be shielded from coming to court and
adjourned till November 3, 2023 for arraignment of the defendants.
However, at Friday’s proceedings, Ibeto was, again, absent in
court.
Jacob, who informed the court that
the matter was for arraignment, recalled that the defendants had been absent at
previous sittings on September 28, and October 5, 2023. "Your lordship will recall that on the
28th of September 2023, this matter came up for arraignment and my friend,
Okoko, SAN appeared for the defendants and pleaded with my lord for adjournment
till 5th of October 2023 to enable him produce the defendant.
Your lordship graciously granted the
request. On the 5th of October, my learned brother silk, Ikpeazu, SAN, came and
represented the defendants and also pleaded with your lordship for adjournment
on the grounds that he wanted to talk to the prosecution to do plea bargain,
and your lordship insisted that the defendant, whatever step to be taken, must
be present in court. Today, the learned senior advocate did not appear. They
now brought another counsel to, again, say that he is not in court”, he said.
Counsel for the defendants, D.A.
Awosika, SAN, who apologized for the absence of his client, said that the
defendant had an underlying ailment. He said: "I am not here to grandstand
and I am not here to disrespect the court. The defendants will always come before
the court to take their pleas.
However, the position of the law is
that when you have a criminal proceedings, it is bifurcated into two: there are
proceedings before plea is taken; and there proceedings after plea is
taken." He, thereafter, argued that
the defence had an application before the court challenging the jurisdiction of
the court to hear the case.
Citing several references, he argued
that the application ought to be heard before the plea could be taken. "He is not running away from the court.
He is not disrespecting the court. I am urging my lord to allow the defence to
move its application challenging jurisdictiction”, he said.
Responding, Jacob noted that a
similar argument was canvassed by the previous counsel, adding that "your lordship said that you will not
take any objection until the court assumes jurisdiction first and sees that the
arraignment takes place. It is then other applications can be taken". He
said, the references adduced by the defence, "were before the advent of
the Administration of Criminal Justice Law, particularly at the Federal level,
and adopted by the Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice Law as
amended.” Citing Section 374 of the ACJL Lagos State as amended, he argued that
the defendant had to take his plea before the defendant could make any
application or objection to the charges.
After listening to all the arguments,
Justice Ijelu, in a terse ruling, held that the defendant must take his plea
before any application could be taken. “The notice of preliminary objection
filed in this case as referred by the defence counsel is challenging the
jurisdiction of the court. The law is that jurisdictional issues can be raised
at any time in the proceedings. However
, the court is of the view that the question of jurisdiction should not be
employed to delay the dispensation of justice.
From the record of this court, it appears evident that an attempt is
being made to shield the defendant from arraignment in this case under so many
disguises. In the circumstance, the court holds that defendants have to take
their pleas and thereafter bring their objection, which the court should
consider along with the substantive issues and a ruling made”, he said.
Thereafter, Jacobs applied to the
court for the issuance of a bench warrant for the arrest of the defendant. Awosika told the court that the defendant was
old and had underlying health issues. He, therefore, raised an objection to the
application, arguing that "there's
no basis for the bench warrant.”
The court, however, held that there
was no cogent reason placed before the court for the continuous absence of the
defendant.
The objection of the defence to the
application for a bench warrant was, thereafter, dismissed by the trial judge.
Justice Ijelu held that “ The application
for bench warrant succeeds, and this case is further adjourned till November
15, 2023 for arraignment.”
