Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Dauda V. FRN (2018) CLR 1(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on Janaury 26th 2018

Brief

  • Computer generated evidence
  • Preliminary objection
  • Money laundering
  • EFCC
  • Documents recovered in course of investigation
  • Charge
  • Sections 14 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act
  • Section 19(3) of the Money Laundering Act
  • Section 14(1)(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act
  • Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 135 Evidence Act, 2011
  • Section 132 Evidence Act, 2011
  • Section 131 Evidence Act, 2011
  • Section 19 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004
  • Section 14 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act
  • Section 84(1) of the Evidence Act 2011
  • Section 84(2) of the Evidence Act 2011
  • Section 84(4) of the Evidence Act 2011
  • Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011

Facts

On 30 October, 2014 the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) preferred a 208 counts charge against the accused/appellant before the Federal High Court, Lokoja in Charge No. FHC/LKJ4C/2011 presided over by I. E. Ekwo J. He pleaded not guilty to each of the counts. Hon. Albert Soje (then Majority Leader) of the Kogi State House of Assembly was also arraigned with the accused /appellant on a two count charge but at the end of the trial he was acquitted and discharged.

The appellant was however convicted on 75 counts while he was acquitted and discharged on the remaining 133 counts. The appellant appealed against this decision to the Court of Appeal, Abuja in his Notice of Appeal dated 17 May, 2016 containing 11 grounds of appeal.

A preliminary objection attacking grounds 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 was raised and argued in the respondent's brief which was filed on 14 November, 2016. The lower Court upheld the objection and struck out grounds 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10 of the Notice of Appeal as well as issues 1, 2 and 4.

The appeal was dismissed and this prompted the further appeal to this Court.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in law when it affirmed the...
  • Read More