34.1 C
Lagos
Saturday, January 23, 2021
- Advertisement -

CBN Froze Accounts of #EndSARS Promoters Before Obtaining Court Order, Defence Lawyer Says

Opinion

2020: A Year Like no Other By Dakuku Peterside

The year 2020 was supposed to be a great year. It was another Leap Year – the famed Olympic Games year when...

The Time to Restructure is Now – Bola Tinubu

Being with you at this special event today, I am visited by two competing emotions. I continue to feel a profound sense...

Africa and the COVID-19 Vaccine – By Dakuku Peterside

The year 2020 will forever be synonymous with Covid-19, a pandemic that brought the world to her knees. For the first time...

Buhari is Repressing Human Rights and Getting Away With It – By Kolawole Olaniyan

President Muhammadu Buhari is failing to live up to his promises to ensure respect for human rights, obey the rule of law,...

A lawyer acting on behalf of protesters whose accounts were frozen by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), has accused Godwin Emefiele, the Governor of the CBN, of ordering the freesing of the bank accounts of his clients without obtaining valid court orders.

Mr Falana who represented Bolatito Oduala and 18 other #EndSARS protesters, asked Justice Ahmed Mohammed, to vacate the order ex-parte granted on November 4, freezing the accounts of 20 alleged #EndSARS promoters.

“We made a serious allegation that the order was obtained on November 4 to cover up the resort to self help by the plaintiff by freezing our clients’ accounts from Oct. 15, two weeks before the order,” Falana said.

Mr Falana said that although the CBN Governor, Godwin Emefiele, attempted to deny the allegation, he had filed documentary evidence of printouts of text message exchanges between his clients and their banks.

“It is a very serious allegation. If your lordship knew that they had frozen the accounts before approaching the court, your lordship would not have exercised discretion in their favour.

“We pray the court to vacate the order ex-parte so that the defendant, who have committed no offence whatsoever to have their rights restored.

“There is no indication that any of the defendants engaged in the commission of any offence.

“There is no scintilla of evidence presented before this court by the plaintiff to the effect that criminal offence is being investigated against the defendants,” Falana added.

The defence lawyer faulted the CBN governor’s reliance on the Terrorism Act to obtain the order, arguing that “under Section 40 of the Act, the CBN is not a prosecuting agency.

“All the agencies that can invoke the law are listed.” He argued that that the CBN was merely labelling every Nigerian a terrorist if one decided to protest. “Peaceful demonstrators are now labelled terrorists,” he said.

He argued that act of peaceful protest and demonstration could not be considered as terrorist acts under the law, noting that Section 1(3) of Terrorism Prevention Act had excluded demonstration or stoppage of work from terrorist acts, within the definition of terrorism.

“Unless it can be shown to court that the protesters engaged in destruction of property, killings, etcetera, but there is no evidence adduced by the plaintiff that the defendants breached or committed the acts set out in the Terrorism Act,” he argued. .

Mr Falana also faulted the procedure adopted by the CBN Governor in obtaining the order, arguing that under Order 26 of the Federal High Court’s Rules, it was wrong for the plaintiff to have just filed an ex-parte motion without accompanying it with either a motion on notice or originating summons, to enable the defendants respond.

“Section 60 of Bank and other Financial Institution Act (BOFIA) that allows the plaintiff to approach the court ought to be read with Section 36 of the Constitution that talks about fair hearing.

“No party in Nigeria is allowed to approach the court on ex-parte order and that ends the case,” he said, adding that no ex-parte order, under the court’s rules lasts more than seven days, unless if renewed, which the plaintiff had not applied for.

Mr Falana asked the court to vacate the order against his clients on November 4, 2020.

Mr Emefiele’s lawyer Michael Aondoakaa asked the court to reject Mr Falana’s request. Mr Aondoakaa, a former Attorney-General of Nigeria, said that his client acted within the law by filing an ex-parte application as required under Section 60 of BOFIA.

He argued that since the law has provided that the CBN could apply for an order ex-parte upon suspicion that any bank account was being used for illegal purpose, it was wrong for Falana to expect his client to act otherwise.

Mr Aondoakaa contended that the rule of the court which Falana relied on could not be elevated above the provision of a law made by the National Assembly.

He faulted the competence of some of the processes filed by the defendants, noting that they contained conflicting facts and evidence. He identified some errors in dates, and urged the court to discountenance the documents. Justice Mohammed, after taking some arguments from parties adjourned further proceedings on the matter until December 10.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Business Profiles

Ngozi Edozien

Ngozi Edozien is the founder and Managing Director of Invivo Partners Limited. She has over 20 years’ experience in finance/private equity, general...

Sanyade Okoli

Sanyade Okoli is Chief Executive Officer at Alpha African Advisory. She has over 21 years of financial advisory, private equity, corporate, commercial...

Samuel Nwanze

Samuel Nwanze is a director of Transcorp Power. He holds an MSc. degree in Finance and Management from Cranfield University in the...

Olukemi Adeniji

Ms Adeniji has a law degree and a Masters in International Law and Diplomacy (M.I.L.D) from the University of Lagos. She has...

Chikezie Nwosu

Chikezie Nwosu is an experienced senior executive with over 29 years local and international experience in the oil & gas industry vis-a-viz...