SAN FRANCISCO, February 08, (THEWILL) – The Federal High Court in Lagos has rejected a plea by a former Niger Delta militant commander, Government Ekpemupolo, otherwise known as Tompolo to vacate the bench warrant issued against him on January 14, 2016.
Justice Ibrahim Buba, in a bench ruling, upheld the warrant of arrest issued against Tompolo and ordered all the law enforcement agencies in the country to ensure that the accused was produced before him on February 19.
Tompolo is wanted by the court in connection with an alleged N34bn fraud brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, which he is said to have perpetrated in conjunction with nine others.
The EFCC had told the court that the 40-count charge against him and the others contravened Section 18 (a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 2012 and were liable to punishment under Section 15 (3) of the same Act.
The suspects were supposed to have been arraigned on January 14, but Tompolo failed to honour a court’s summons dated January 12 to appear, leading the judge to issue a warrant for his arrest. But rather than appear, Tompolo, through his lawyer, Mr. Tayo Oyetibo SAN, brought an application urging the judge to set aside the arrest warrant issued against him.
Oyetibo, in his argument, held that his client had not been properly served with the charge sheet and the summons, stressing that though the court granted the EFCC an order for substituted service, the anti-graft agency only pasted the charge sheet and summons at a wrong address.
While urging the court to rule that his client had not been served and that the bench warrant ought not to have been issued, Oyetibo added that the Federal Government did not obtain the leave of the court to change its designation on the charge sheet from plaintiff to complainant.
However, Justice Buba dismissed the application, noting that Oyetibo was in court because he was briefed by Tompolo, and as such the accused could not claim that he was unaware of the charge pending against him.
The judge described as frivolous the argument that the Federal Government did not first seek the leave of the court before amending its status from plaintiff to complainant in the charge and urged counsel not to waste the time of the court on mere technicalities.
According to him, “The entire gamut of this application is for the court to set aside the order granting substituted service of the charge.
“The first defendant missed the point completely. The law is that anybody like the EFCC has the power to arrest anyone if it has reasonable belief that such person has committed an offence.”
“On January 12 when the application for substituted service was moved, one of the averments was that the applicant was invited by the EFCC to answer to some allegations, but up till today he has not deemed it fit to honour the invitation.”
“It is very clear that the order for substituted service is more than justified against a man who has refused to honour lawful invitation by the EFCC.
“Not only is the accused aware of the charge but has further briefed counsel representing him, who on his behalf, demanded for all processes filed.”
“Therefore, all the authorities cited on this issue are, with respect, misconceived. Whether served by substituted means or not, the accused is aware of the charge.”
“The application challenging service is misconceived same be and is hereby dismissed.”
“The order for arrest still subsists. All authorities in Nigeria are hereby further ordered to ensure that the order of this court for the arrest of Ekpemupolo a.k.a Tompolo is carried out to the letter.”
