EFCC re-arraign Diezani, ex-INEC officials over N264 million election bribe
Former Minister of Petroleum Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke and two former officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr. Christian Nwosu and Mr. Tijani Bashir, have been re-arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) before the Federal High Court, Lagos.
In the amended charge preferred against the defendants, Diezani was to be at large while INEC ex-Administrative Secretary, Mr. Nwosu with Mr. Bashir were docked before Justice Mohammed Idris.
The duo are allegedly to have received a N264 million bribe from the former minister, Alison-Madueke, to rig the 2015 general elections.
They allegedly conspired to directly take possession of N264,880,000, which they reasonably ought to have known forms part of an unlawful act, which is gratification.
The defendants also allegedly made a cash payment of N70,050,000 to Yisa Adedoyin, which exceeded the amount authorised by law without going through a financial institution.
Bashir was accused of indirectly taking possession of and retaining N164,880,000. He was also charged with indirectly retaining N30 million, being part of the proceeds of an unlawful act: criminal misappropriation.
The prosecution said he indirectly concealed the N30 million.
The alleged offences were committed on March 27 and April 7, 2015.
Nwosu had earler pleaded guilty to the charge when first arraigned before the court, but later changed his plea to not guilty after a plea bargain arrangement with EFCC failed.
When the court’s registrar read the 9-count amended charge to them Wednesday, the duo again pleaded not guilty.
EFCC had closed its case after calling two witnesses.
Prosecuting counsel Rotimi Oyedepo said he would not call any further witnesses despite the amended charge.
Before the re-arraignment, counsels to the defendants, Victor Opara and Nelson Umoh, had opposed the move to amend the charge on the basis that it would further delay the case.
They said prosecution did not respond to a no-case submission filed by their clients despite being served.
They also argued that the amendment would defeat the object of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, which provides for speedy dispensation of cases.
