By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA–The Supreme Court has affirmed the 12-year jail term that was handed down to erstwhile Chairman of the Governing Council of Kwara State Polytechnic, Dr. Saadu Alanamu, by the Kwara State High Court.
The apex court, in a unanimous judgement by a five-man panel of Justices, said it found no reason to set-aside the concurrent decisions of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal, which found Dr. Alanamu guilty of criminal charges the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, preferred against him.
Dr. Alanamu, before his conviction, was in 2017, nominated into the Board of the ICPC, but was dropped following allegations of corruption against him.
He was subsequently investigated and charged to court by the ICPC on an allegation that he received N5million bribe from a contractor as kickback for the award of contracts in the Polytechnic.
In a judgement that was delivered by Justice Mahmud Abdulgafar, the Kwara State High Court sentenced him to 12 years imprisonment.
Dissatisfied with the verdict, Dr. Alanamu approached the Court of Appeal, urging it to quash the judgment of the trial court.
His appeal was however dismissed by the appellate court for want of merit.
Still not satisfied with the ruling of the Court of Appeal, the appellant lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court.
In a four-ground of appeal he filed at the apex court, Dr. Alanamu, through his lawyer, Professor Amuda Kanike, SAN, argued that the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000, under which he was tried and convicted, was repealed by ICPC Act, 2003.
The appellant further urged the apex court to determine whether he could be validly tried and convicted for different offences, under different counts in the same trial, and based on the same set of facts.
He therefore urged the apex court to upturn his conviction by both the trial and appellate court.
Meanwhile, in its judgement, the Supreme Court struck out all grounds of the appeal for being incompetent, misconceived and lacking in merit.
It accordingly affirmed the conviction and sentencing of the Appellant to 12 years imprisonment based on the same facts handed down to him by both the appellate and the trial court.