Connect with us

Judiciary

Again, Leo Stan Ekeh, Floors Femi Falana on Alleged N162m Fraud Case!

Published

2 months ago

on

Zinox  

For the umpteenth time, the court has thrown out a case of fraud filed against the tech magnate and Chairman of Zinox Technologies, Mr. Leo Stan Ekeh, his wife, Chioma Ekeh and 11 others.
The latest is the dismissal of the suit by Justice Akpan Okon Ebong of the Federal High Court, Abuja who struck out the case filed by Mr. Femi Falana SAN, purporting to act on a fiat donated to him by the Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi SAN, against Leo Stan Ekeh, and 12 others.

The other defendants are Mr. Chris Eze Ozims, Oyebode Folashade, Charles Adigwe, Obilo Onuoha, Agartha Ukoha, Anya O. Anya, Femi Dosumu, Nnenna Kalu, Admas Digital Technologies Limited, Technology Distributions Limited and Zinox Technologies Limited.

In the suit No. FCT/HC/CR/985/24 filed in November 2024, Falana on behalf of his client, Benjamin Joseph, the CEO of Citadel Oracle Concept Limited, an Ibadan-based computer firm, filed charges against Ekeh, 9 other individuals and 3 companies before the Federal High Court in Abuja for allegedly diverting N162,247,513.80 being payment for laptop supply contract at the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) Headquarters which Technology Distribution Ltd (now TD Africa), the biggest tech equipment distributor in Sub Saharan Africa, supplied on behalf of Citadel in 2012.

However, in the Certified True Copy of the judgment dated March 20, 2025, Justice Ebong ruled as follows: “It is my conclusion based on the foregoing that this charge (No. FCT/HC/CR/985/2024, Federal Republic of Nigeria Vs Leo Stan Ekeh and 12 ORS) constitutes a gross abuse of court process and is liable to dismissal. I accordingly hereby dismiss it.”

Before arriving at his judgment which has put a final nail on the coffin of a case that other courts had dismissed in the past as dead on arrival, Justice Ebong had considered the outcome of previous cases and petitions filed by Joseph none of which was in his favour.

Justice Ebong said: “One intriguing aspect of this matter is that none of the law enforcement agencies involved in the investigation of the nominal complainant’s (Joseph) numerous petitions has found merit in any of his allegations against the defendants. When called upon before Senchi J. (Justice Danlami Z. Senchi) to prove his said allegations to the court, he failed to turn up in court. One then wonders on what premise he wants to maintain this campaign of persecution against the defendants.

”Previous judgments on the matter had established that rather than being the culprit, Ekeh and the 12 others were actually the victims of a failed money diversion scheme plotted by Joseph and Citadel.”

When contacted, one of the defendants, Mr. Chris Eze Ozims, a lawyer, said: “This ruling truly reflects our consistent position on the allegations, and it is good that we have been vindicated, once more, by a competent high court.”

He asserted that the judgment of Justice Ebong was consistent with the position of the defendants and in tandem with the ruling of other judges who had earlier adjudicated on the same matter in the past.

Chief Counsel to the defendants, Mr. Matthew Burkaa SAN, described the judgment as victory for integrity and the rule of law.

Court papers showed that Falana’s suit was based on the same claims which various courts had in the past dismissed as falsehood and baseless.

The case arose from a contract between Citadel and Technology Distributions Limited over the supply of computers to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), a project fully funded by Technology Distributions and has no bearing whatsoever with Zinox and its promoter, Leo Stan Ekeh.

It will be recalled that Joseph had lost the case and its adjunct suits at different courts in the past.

In his petition to the police in 2013, it was discovered by police authorities that Joseph provided false information to the Police, prompting the Inspector General of Police to charge him for false information in Charge No. CR/216/16.

In another case filed by the EFCC at his instance against his partner, Princess Kama, in Charge No. FCT/HC/CR/244/2018, Justice Danlami Z. Senchi of the FCT High Court (as he then was), dismissed as false all the allegations made by Benjamin Joseph, and imposed the sum of N20 million as damages against him for false petitioning in relation to these same allegations.

Earlier Court papers showed that Joseph had in his statement on oath in Suit No: LD/4335/2014 in the High Court of Justice, Lagos State, dated 28 June, 2019 averred that his company, Citadel, did not execute any contract with FIRS and that he was not aware that a contract was awarded to Citadel.

In his deposition under oath, Joseph claimed that Citadel “did not at any time execute any contract for the FIRS and neither did the 2nd defendant (Princess O. Kama) who is its agent in respect of the contract it bidded for with the FIRS deliver/release any documents to the Claimant (Citadel) indicating that the contract it bidded for or any other contract was awarded to it by the FIRS or any other body.”

However, a letter from the FIRS addressed to the Chamber of Afe Babalola & Co dated 11 February 2014 (FIRS/PD/GDS/2559) and signed by one Idrissa Kogo, Head, Legal Department, stated: “Contrary to your client’s claim that they knew nothing about the execution of the contract awarded to them and that they did not receive any payment for the execution of the contract, our record reveals otherwise.

“Your client instructed FIRS through a letter dated 13th December 2012 to deal with Princess O. Kama (Your client’s agent) in relation to the contract. Through three separate letters dated 20th December 2012, your client instructed FIRS to pay to the client’s account with Access Bank plc. Please note that FIRS acted in compliance with your client’s instruction and with due diligence,” the FIRS letter stated.

The FIRS letter was a response to inquiry by Afe Babalola Chamber, Lawyers to Citadel Oracle Concept Ltd and its MD, Benjamin Joseph, at that time.

The current charges filed by Falana on the basis of a fiat from the Attorney General is the third in a row as Joseph had earlier filed charge number CR/469/2022, which was struck out by Justice C. O. Oba of the FCT High Court, by an order dated 8th November 2022.

Determined to push through his case, Joseph filed the same charges before Honorable Justice A. S. Adepoju of the FCT High Court, and the charges were, once again, struck out by the Honorable Court on 19th March 2024, with Justice Adepoju holding that: “This matter was brought in dead, extinct and should be confined into the dustbin of history…I hold that the instant suit is an abuse of the process of court and it is hereby struck out accordingly.”

59 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO
SEO Score
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Judiciary

Court of Appeal Strikes Out Ogun Government’s Appeal Over Datkem Plaza Demolition

Published

3 months ago

on

February 11, 2025

By

 

The Court of Appeal sitting in Ibadan has struck out an appeal filed by the Ogun State Government challenging the ruling over the controversial demolition of Datkem Plaza, a five-story complex in Ijebu-Ode owned by Yeye Olufunke Daniel, the wife of former Ogun State Governor, Otunba Gbenga Daniel.

The appeal, presided over by Hon. Justice Y.B. Nimpar, was dismissed for lack of competence, dealing a significant blow to the administration of Governor Dapo Abiodun, which has faced intense scrutiny and criticism over the circumstances surrounding the destruction of the multi-billion-naira property.

The demolition of Datkem Plaza, valued at approximately N5 billion, was carried out in the dead of the night on a weekend, raising suspicions of politically motivated sabotage.

Reports indicate that the building, which was already completed and awaiting commissioning just two weeks before it was brought down, was targeted by agents allegedly acting on the orders of the Ogun State Government.

Unconfirmed sources claim that the initial plan was to use dynamite to create the illusion that the structure had collapsed due to structural defects.

However, upon realizing that the explosion could damage surrounding buildings and expose the act as deliberate sabotage, the perpetrators allegedly opted for jackhammers and bulldozers, executing the demolition under the cover of darkness.

Eyewitnesses who spoke to journalists described the scene as “a well-coordinated operation” designed to erase the landmark building, which many had believed would become the tallest structure in Ijebuland.
By the time daylight broke, Datkem Plaza was nothing but rubble—its dream of becoming a thriving commercial hub obliterated overnight.

Following the demolition, the Ogun State Government defended its actions, citing regulatory infractions as the basis for bringing down the structure. Officials claimed that Datkem Plaza violated planning approvals, a claim the owners vehemently denied, providing evidence of compliance with all necessary regulations.

In response, Yeye Olufunke Daniel dragged the state government to court, arguing that the destruction of her property was illegal, vindictive, and politically motivated. The lower court ruled in her favor, prompting the Ogun State Government to file an appeal, which has now been struck out for lack of competence by the Court of Appeal in Ibadan.

The demolition of Datkem Plaza ignited a political firestorm, with many interpreting it as a direct attack on the Daniel family, given the longstanding political rivalry between Governor Abiodun and former Governor Gbenga Daniel, who is now a senator representing Ogun East Senatorial District.

Observers see the Court of Appeal’s decision as a legal and moral victory for the Daniel family, reinforcing the argument that the demolition was not based on law, but rather on political vendetta.

With the appeal dismissed, legal analysts believe the Ogun State Government could face further legal consequences, including potential financial compensation for the destruction of the multi-billion-naira property. Meanwhile, the Daniels’ supporters are celebrating the verdict as a step toward justice in what they call “one of the most brazen acts of executive impunity in Ogun State’s history.”

While the Ogun State Government has yet to respond to the Court of Appeal’s decision, legal experts suggest that it may have limited options left, as the ruling effectively upholds the lower court’s judgment.

For now, the spotlight remains on Governor Abiodun’s administration, with critics demanding accountability for the demolition of a structure that could have transformed the economic landscape of Ijebu-Ode

5 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO
SEO Score
Continue Reading

Judiciary

NJC sets up panel to investigate allegations against Osun Chief Judge

Published

6 months ago

on

November 20, 2024

By

 

 

The National Judicial Council, under the Chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has reportedly constituted a committee to investigate multiple allegations against Osun State Chief Judge, Hon. Justice Adepele Ojo.

In its 107th meeting on November 13 and 14, 2024, the NJC sanctioned five judicial officers for misconduct and recommended the formation of a committee to probe the various complaints against Justice Ojo.

At the heart of the allegations are claims that Justice Ojo has repeatedly failed to adhere to legal and ethical standards expected of her position.

A petition submitted to the NJC by the Concerned Citizens of Nigeria, Osun State Chapter, further outlined the gravity of the allegations.

The petition claims that Justice Ojo’s actions have violated both the spirit and the letter of the law. The group accuses her of gross abuse of office, breaches of professional ethics, and a blatant disregard for the rule of law, which they argue has led to a loss of public trust in the judiciary.

It would be recalled that Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke had suspended Justice Ojo following a resolution by the State House of Assembly.

The resolution cited serious allegations of misconduct, abuse of power, corruption, and failure to uphold the rule of law.

Some of the allegations against Justice Ojo include, taking personal vengeance against judiciary staff, she dismissed several staff members who had shown courage in reporting her actions, creating a climate of fear and retaliation within the judiciary.

46 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO
SEO Score
Continue Reading

Judiciary

Oil Magnate, Akinduro Sues EFCC, Demands N5b For Unlawfully Declaring Him Wanted

Published

7 months ago

on

October 17, 2024

By

Dr. Henry Mobolaji Akinduro, Chairman/CEO of Global Signature Hotel and Total Grace Group Limited, has filed a N5 billion lawsuit against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for allegedly declaring him wanted unlawfully.
In the suit filed on Wednesday at the Federal High Court, Lagos, Akinduro submitted that the EFCC declared him wanted without any form of judicial intervention, recourse to constitutional safeguards or order of court.
The EFCC on Friday, 11 October, 2024 at about 7.20pm on its official twitter handle, also known as ‘X’ declared the oil magnate ‘Wanted’. The businessman is praying the court to order the EFCC to remove his name from the wanted list published on the commission’s official website or any other related platform including Twitter (X).
Akinduro is seeking N5 billion as “general damages”.
On Monday 14 October, 2024, the businessman, via his counsel, Olalekan Ojo SAN had petitioned the Executive Chairman of the EFCC over the unconstitutional violation of his fundamental human rights to personal liberty and human dignity by the publication of his name on the list of wanted persons on the EFCC’s website.
Ojo averred in the petition that at all times preceding the said publication there was no order of any Court of competent jurisdiction authorizing the said publication and no charge had been preferred against our Client before any Court of law.
According to Akinduro’s Lawyer, the Commission had allegedly made the said illegal or unlawful publication declaring him wanted upon the prompting or instigation of one Mr. Femi Olushakin who had earlier written a petition against the oil magnate in respect of a N240 million contractual dispute between them —Messrs Olushakin and Akinduro.
He affirmed that disputes had arisen from the investment agreement entered into between the two men leading to Olushakin petitioning EFCC.
“Our Client (Akinduro) was invited by the Commission on 4th June, 2024 and he immediately responded via letter dated 5th June, 2024 notifying the Commission of his unavailability due to medical reasons. In the said letter, it was stated therein that our Client was out of the Country receiving medical attention. He subsequently provided assurances that he would be present at the Commission as soon as he was medically cleared to travel. It is pertinent at this juncture to chronicle the genesis of the subject matter which led to the declaration of our Client Wanted by the Commission,” Ojo stated.
The Counsel disclosed that there was a business transaction between Akinduro and Olushakin which was backed by a viable collateral which included Akinduro’s Global Signature Hotel worth N500 million, three (3) 60-Seater Yutong buses valued at over N240 million and a Toyota 4Runner SUV.
Ojo claimed that Olushakin has sold the three 60-Seater Yutong buses and currently drives around the city in the Toyota 4Runner SUV which were used as collateral by Akinduro.
“It is clear from the above that this is a purely civil business transaction with no element of criminality embedded in it. Mr. Femi Olushakin maliciously petitioned the Commission after selling the 60-Seater Yutong buses and currently using the Toyota 4runner SUV for his personal use,” he stated.
The Senior Lawyer added that despite Akinduro’s medical condition overseas, he has maintained close communication with the Commission.
“Our Client regularly sends his Legal Officer to the Commission, affirming his willingness and desire to appear before the Commission upon due confirmation of his being fit to travel by his doctors. There was no further request by the Commission inviting our Client before the unlawful publication.
“It is to be further noted that on 11 October, 2024, our Client’s Legal Officer was physically present at the office of the Commission around noon to submit a correspondence to the Commission and he also reassured the Operatives of the Commission of our Client’s desire and willingness to cooperate with the investigation by the Commission upon his arrival in Nigeria.
“It is regrettable that despite the repeated reassurances of our Client to cooperate with the investigation upon his arrival in Nigeria, the Commission proceeded to declare our Client ‘Wanted’ later that same day at about 7.20pm without an order of Court and in the absence of a valid charge in a Court of law.
“The Commission published our Client’s name and photograph depicting our Client as a fugitive from the law and branded him “WANTED” without any evidence of evading investigation. This action of the Commission has not only defamed our Client but also violated our Client’s right to freedom of movement without the order of the Courts.
“The Commission has also by the unlawful publication subjected our Client to public humiliation and ridicule thus causing our Client loss of personal and business relationships as well as reputational damage. It is our instruction that since the publication, our Client has been inundated with calls, Whatsapp messages from his business associates all over the world who had read the post expressing their disgust and dismay at the defamatory publication, and the said publication has also caused our Client emotional trauma and distress.”
Akinduro, through his lawyer, said he considered it imperatively necessary to put the records straight with a view to showing that the fraud allegations are trumped-up allegations aimed at causing incalculable damage to his hard earned but richly deserved reputation.
“It is pertinent to state that the petition against Dr. Henry Akinduro was an ignoble attempt to criminalize purely contractual disputes that had arisen from the investment agreement between Dr. Henry Akinduro and the Petitioner, Mr. Femi Olushakin,” he said.
Ojo stated that the commercial or contractual disputes had earlier been referred to the competent Court by the parties before Olushakin resorted to lodging the fraud allegations against the oil magnate for reasons best known to him.
“Indeed, with knowledge of this, Mr. Femi Olushakin through his
lawyers, as part of the originating processes filed towards the resolution of the dispute between the parties
in court, the Petitioner (the Defendant in the Civil Suit No I/87512024 at the State High Court, Ibadan Judicial Division, Oyo State of Nigeria) has filed a Counterclaim. Some of the reliefs set out in the Counter Claims are as follows:
– AN ORDER directing the Defendants to the Counter Claim to pay the sum of N250 million Naira only to the Counter Claimant, sum of which was invested by the Counter Claimant into the business of the Defendants to the Counter Claim (Dr. Henry Akinduro and co)
– AN ORDER directing the Defendants to the Counter Claim to pay the sum of N205,325,000 to the Counter Claimant being the Return on Investment (ROI) to be paid to the Counter Claimants by the Defendant to the Counter Claimants.
– AN ORDER directing the Defendants to the Counter Claim to pay the sum of N52.5 million to the Counter Claimant (Mr. Femi Olushakin) being the Return on Investment (ROI) to be paid to the Counter Claimant by the Defendants to the Counter Claim on the investment of N100 million only).
– An Order directing the Defendants to the Counter Claim to pay the sum of N10 million only) to the Counter Claimant being the shortfall or deficit.
“One would have expected that Olushakin would allow the Court to decide the rights and liabilities of the parties since the matter is already sub-judice. Our client has taken further legal actions towards establishing with compelling finality that the fraud allegations made against him are unfounded, groundless, baseless and ill-motivated. It is pertinent to stress that our client is presumed innocent by constitutional fiat until the contrary is proved or established. Our Client wishes to restate his confidence in the judicial process which he believes will vindicate him,” Akinduro’s lawyer submitted.

 

Continue Reading

Trending News