Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Dasuki V. FRN (2018) CLR 3© (SC)

Judgement delivered on March 2nd 2018

Brief

  • Concurrent finding of fact
  • Decisions not appealed against
  • Issues for determination
  • Fair hearing
  • Section 285 (7) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 285 (6) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 6(6) (a) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 294(1) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 285 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 131 (1) of the Evidence Act, 2011
  • Section 307 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015

Facts

The appellant and 5 others were arraigned at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (hereinafter called "the trial court") on an information alleging various allegations of criminal breach of trust, fraud, dishonest misappropriation of monies belonging to the Federal Government of Nigeria etc. In all, the appellant and the co-accused are being prosecuted on 19 charges.

Upon arraignment the trial court, on 18th December 2015, granted the appellant bail on terms.

The terms on which the order releasing the appellant on bail was predicated were further reproduced in the Enrolled Order dated 21st December, 2015. The appellant met the bail terms, and was consequently released from the Federal Prison, Kuje, where he was held on remand on 29th December, 2015. The order releasing the appellant from the prison custody was carried out by the Controller of the Kuje Prison. The appellant was immediately re-arrested and taken away by officers of the Directorate of State Services (DSS).

When the trial court granted bail on 18th December 2015, it also directed the fixture of the trial of the appellant and the other 5 co-accused persons to 2nd & 3rd days of February, 2016. The hearing has been frustrated since because of the interlocutory application and appeals.

On 12th January 2016, in reaction to his re-arrest, the appellant filed the motion, the subject of this appeal, praying the trial court for the following orders.

  • 1
    AN ORDER prohibiting the complainant from further prosecuting the instant charge or any other charge against the 1st Defendant, or seeking any form of indulgence before this Honourable Court or any other Court in Nigeria, except and unless it complies with the Order of this Court made on 18th December, 2015, the said Order which remains valid for all intents and purposes, having not been set aside by any Appellate Court.
  • 2
    AN ORDER discharging the 1st Defendant/Applicant of all the offences contained in the instant Charge, the said Charge which cannot be lawfully prosecuted by the Complainant who is in brazen disobedience of a subsisting Order of this Honourable Court made on 18th December, 2015.

    • Alternatively

  • 3
    A Mandatory Order directing the Complainant who acts through the Department of State Services/EFCC and other enforcement agencies, to immediately produce the 1st Defendant in Court, by which this Honourable Court may give directives as it considers appropriate, for the administration of justice in accordance with the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.

    • Alternatively

  • 4
    AN ORDER staying further proceedings in this Charge until the 1st Defendant/Appellant exhausts the remedies available to him in law for the enforcement of his right to liberty, the said right which had already been preserved by the Order of 18th December, 2015.
  • 5
    An for such Orders or other Orders this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this case.

The grounds for the application are said to be

  • 1
    Until set aside, an Order of Court remains valid for all intents and purposes.
  • 2
    The Complainant having brazenly defied the order of Court made on 18th December 2015 is in contempt of the proceedings and majesty of this Honourable Court, contrary to Section 6(6) (a) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
  • 3
    Until the Complainant complies with the afore described subsisting Order of this Honourable Court, it cannot continue to lawfully prosecute this Charge, neither can it be afforded any right of audience in any Court in Nigeria.
  • 4
    In consequence of the above, the 1st Defendant is entitled to be discharged of all the offences contained in the present Charge whereof he stands trial.
  • 5
    In the light of the Complainant's continued denial of the 1st Defendant/Applicant's right to take benefit of the Order admitting him to bail.
  • 6
    This noble Court has powers to grant the reliefs sought herein for the protection of its majesty, integrity, and the rule of law in our democracy, ditto the preservation of law, order and judicial powers of the Court entrenched in the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

The trial court, after hearing the parties and considering their various positions, dismissed the application having come to the conclusion, on the facts, that it "did not make any order against (the) re-arrest" of the appellant and that the 1st respondent, "the complainant in this case is not in contempt of my Order of 18th December, 2015".

The appellant appealed the ruling dismissing his application seeking an order, inter alia, to prohibit the 1st respondent from further prosecuting him on four (4) grounds of appeal.

The Court of Appeal, in its discretion, adopted the sole issue formulated by the 1st respondent for the determination of the appeal, and resolved the appeal on that sole issue. In dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal (per Aboki, JCA), found, inter alia, that since trial court made no order against the re-arrest or further arrest of the appellant, no order of the trial court was consequently disobeyed or flouted either by the 1st respondent, EFCC, or the DSS.

This further appeal, brought on 7 grounds of appeal, is consequent upon that decision of the lower court dismissing his appeal on 15th June 2016.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether by hearing the appeal and adjourning judgment to 4pm of the...
    • Read More