Connect with us

General News

Alleged N7.6B Fraud Case: Appeal Court Rejects Retrial Motion for Gov. Orji Kalu

Published

on

By Iyojo Ameh

In a recent development regarding the N7.6 billion fraud and money laundering case involving former Abia State Governor, Orji Uzor Kalu, the Federal Government’s attempt to retry him has been struck down.

Justice Joseph Kayode Oyewole, presiding over the Appeal Court in Abuja, dismissed the government’s suit on grounds of incompetence and unreliability, deeming it unfit for consideration by any court.

Among the reasons cited by Justice Oyewole was the inadequacy of the compiled, signed, and certified record of appeal, which lacked proper legal authentication.

Previously, on December 5, 2019, a Federal High Court had sentenced Kalu, now a senator representing Abia North, to 12 years in prison for embezzling N7.

6 billion from the Abia State Treasury during his tenure as governor.

However, the Supreme Court nullified this judgment, citing the conflict of interest involving Justice Mohammed Idris, who delivered the verdict while already serving as a Justice of the Court of Appeal.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court, led by Justice Ejembi Ekwo, emphasized that Justice Idris could not concurrently serve as a Federal High Court Judge and a Justice of the Court of Appeal.

Consequently, the Apex court directed the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to assign the case to a new judge for a fresh trial.

See also  Economy: Industrialist canvases patronage of locally produced furniture

Subsequently, Kalu sought relief from the Federal High Court, where Justice Inyang Ekwo issued an order prohibiting the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from initiating a new prosecution, citing ambiguity in the Supreme Court’s judgment regarding Kalu’s status.

Unsatisfied with this decision, the prosecution appealed against Justice Ekwo’s ruling.

However, on Wednesday, the appeal was dismissed due to the prosecution’s failure to produce accurate records of the proceedings from the high court.

0Shares