By Henry Ojelu

A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has threatened to close the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF’s case in the trial of Mr. Kenneth Amadi charged over alleged N2.9 billion fraud if prosecution witnesses are not produced in court by next adjourned date.

Justice Ambrose Allagoa gave the hint, last week Friday when the matter was called for continuation of trial and the federal government’s prosecuting team told the court that they could not proceed with the trial due to their inability to bring any of their witnesses.

Amadi is standing trial before the court on charges of fraud brought against him by the Attorney-General of the Federation.

Naham Damar who appeared for the prosecution told the court that the lead counsel was out on official duty and moreover, the next witness, the IPO was not available.

READ ALSO: Magodo tussle: Lagos govt seeks clarification from S’Court over CoOs’ issuance

Responding, defense counsel Dr. Monday Ubani in his submission opposed the prosecution’s request for adjournment.

He told the court that the defendant is desirous of concluding the matter and go on with his life, urging the court to ensure that if the prosecution is not ready to proceed by the next adjourned date, the court should close the prosecution case and allow the defendant to open its defence.

Granting the prosecution’s request for adjournment, Justice Allagoa told counsel representing the AGF that if by the next adjourned date March 24, 2022, they refuse/fail to bring their witnesses for the matter to continue, he will have to close the prosecution’s case.

“If by the next adjourned date the prosecution fails to bring their witnesses for the proceedings to continue unhindered, I would not hesitate to close their case”, Justice Allagoa said.

Since the commencement of the trial, the prosecution has brought only two witnesses.

At last proceedings on January 20, the second prosecution witness and accountant with Eunisell Ltd, Mr. Philip Odekina had under cross-examination, stated that the defendant did not defraud Eunisell Ltd, as alleged by the prosecution.


Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.