THE lawyer representing the embattled former acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu, has stated that the Justice Ayo Salami panel investigating activities of the anti-corruption commission under his client cannot submit any interim report without hearing from him [Magu].
The lawyer, Wahab Shittu, in a press release he signed and made available to the Nigerian Tribune on Sunday, was reacting to a report (not in the Tribune titles,) claiming that the panel has commended the sack and prosecution of Magu.
According to Shittu, the story was “a false story being orchestrated in the public space, contrary to the stage of ongoing proceedings before the panel. “We wish to state with a high sense of responsibility that our client is yet to formally present his defence. Proceedings are ongoing and witnesses are still lined up for next week beginning from Monday [today].”
Shittu stated that in spite of repeated demands, Magu had not been served with copies of allegations against him, adding that the instrument embodying the terms of reference was not served on his client until August 8, 35 days after proceedings had commenced.
He stated further that the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Mr Abubakar Malami, “whose memo triggered the proceedings”, is yet to be summoned to testify to support the allegations against Magu, adding that: “He who asserts must prove.”
According to Shittu, Magu was excluded from the initial stages of the proceedings by the panel with several witnesses testifying in his absence, adding that he (Shittu) was not allowed to cross-examine many of the witnesses who had testified until recently.
“Our client is yet to be granted access to petitions/ presentations, case files and exhibits admitted in the proceedings. Please note that we have written to the panel to that effect. “Our client was accosted on the street and compulsorily requested to appear ‘immediately’ before the panel without the opportunity to access documents to adequately prepare his defence.
“That our client was subsequently detained for 10 days after appearing before the panel in unpleasant circumstances. This detention is not covered by the terms of reference arising from the instrument constituting the judicial commission of inquiry.
“That our client, owing to his suspension from office, is unable to have access to official documents and other information necessary for his defence. “That cases pending before superior courts of records such as the Federal High Court, Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court is being reviewed in the proceedings.
We believe that this development is subjudice and unhealthy for our jurisprudence. “That witness appearing before the panel was not sworn an oath before giving evidence as stipulated under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act, 2004 on whose authority the instrument setting up the Judicial Commission of Inquiry is derived,” Magu’s counsel stated.
Shittu further said it was curious and worrisome that an administrative panel of the inquiry headed by Justice Salami, having sat and taken evidence, both oral and documentary, in the past one month, suddenly metamorphosed into a judicial commission of inquiry.
He submitted: “How this comes within the contemplation of a commission of the Tribunal of Inquiry Act, 2004 is very questionable.” Shittu then objected to what he termed “piecemeal release of the so-called interim the report in the social media,” particularly an online medium which claimed to have seen it.
According to the lawyer, “It is instructive to state that the the online medium went ahead to recklessly engaged in the libellous publication where it listed individuals and companies being investigated for corruption by the EFCC, allegedly paid bribes to my client.
We are shocked about such a libellous publication against my client without hearing from him.” Shittu declared that the entirety of the publication in the online platform was “first-class falsehood from the pit of hell,” adding that none of the issues contained in the report arose from the proceedings of the Salami panel.
“I recall Pastor Omale appearing before the panel to confirm openly that none of the transfers into the church’s accounts emanated from Magu and that Magu never donated to his personal or church account.
It is also instructive to note that no character by the name Shanono ever appeared before the judicial commission of inquiry. The purveyors of this fake news may assume they are destroying the sterling image of Magu, but I have news for them. Majority of Nigerians cannot be fooled,” he stated.
He confirmed that the proceedings are still ongoing and that Magu is yet to present his defence, adding that the issue of an interim report submitted to President Muhammadu Buhari did not arise. “We urge those bent on prejudicing the proceedings of the panel by planting false stories in the public space to think of the interest of our country and not prejudge our the client whose commitment all along is service to the country,” he said, adding that the only thing keeping Magu going was the conviction of his innocence.