An FCT High Court presided over by Justice Abimbola Banjoko, on Tuesday threw out an application by Senator Nicholas Ugbane, erstwhile chairman of the  Senate committee on power, seeking to quash the N5.2 billion corruption charges against him. 

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC had on May 14,2009 arraigned Ugbane who is the 3^rd accused along with Hon Ndudi Elumelu, Hon. Paulinus Igwe, Hon. Mohammed Jibo, all members of the House of Representatives.

Others charged in the case are the Managing Director of REA, Engr. Samuel Gekpe, the Permanent Secretary in the Federal Ministry of Power, Dr. Abdullahi Aliyu, Simon Kirdi Nanle, Engr. Lawrence Kayode Orekoya, Abdulsamad Garba Jahun, Bar. Kayode I. Oyedeji.

They are being prosecuted for their roles in a N5.2 billion Rural Electrification Agency contract scam bordering on criminal conspiracy, breach of public trust, theft and misappropriation of public funds.

The senator representing Kogi state in the National Assembly had earlier asked the court through his counsel, Barrister K.C Turaki to quash the charges against him for lacking prima-facie evidence. He also said that he was covered by immunity as a person in the discharge of his legislative duties.

After a review of the various arguments advanced by both  the applicant’s counsel ,supported by counsel to other accused persons, and that of the prosecution counsel, Godwin Obla,  the judge said that what was needed was not a basis for conviction but a ground to proceed with the allegation against the applicant.

To justify her decision, Justice Banjoko, cited the position of the Supreme Court in respect of Abacha Vs the State; Ugbanati  Vs Commissioner of Police and the State Vs Ikomu. She stated that what the Supreme Court said was that evidence needs not be sufficient to convict at this point in time, but such evidence that would just require the accused person to offer explanations.

She further posited that it was still early and premature to determine whether the relevant section of the legislative Act on immunity was open to Senator Ugbane as this could be determined in the course of trial.  She argued that from the proof of evidence there was a prima-facie case against the third accused person.

Her words, “Criminal charge is still an allegation that will have to go the full length of legal battle to be determined and the issue of immunity as provided in Section 3 of the Legislative Proceeding Act will be ironed out at the appropriate time, therefore, the course of justice would be best served if the trial is allowed to continue.”  

While striking out the application, the judge stated that accelerated hearing would be given the case.

Immediately the ruling was delivered, counsel to both the 8^th and 9^th accused persons sought to move similar applications seeking a leave to quash the cases against their clients. But sensing an attempt  to stretch the proceeding especially as some of the applications were not yet filed, the judge ordered them to file and serve the prosecution.

She has fixed January 21and 22, 2010 for both the adoption of motions and definite hearing of the case.