Justice Suleiman Belgore of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Garki, on Tuesday, cleared an Abuja-based lawyer, Dr. Ted Iseghohi-Edwards, of allegations of fraud or criminal conduct in the services he rendered to the 774 local governments in relation to the London and Paris Clubs refunds.
Incorporated Trustees of the Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON) had engaged Iseghohi-Edwards to represent the 774 local government areas in the country in the London/Paris Club refunds matters.
However, following his arrest, detention, and threat of further arrest for alleged fraud in the London and Paris Club refunds, the claimant initiated a fundamental rights suit against the federal government.
Respondents in the suit marked: CV/2569/26 were the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Inspector General of Police (IGP), and the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN).
Delivering judgement on Tuesday, the court held that the report issued by EFCC on August 14, 2024 with Reference Number EFCC/EC/AGF/07/VOL.1/70, titled “Re: Request for investigation report on London-Paris Club matters,” in which the applicant was accused of fraud, was fabricated solely to damage his reputation.
Belgore stated that the 2024 report by EFCC lacked depth and was in conflict with earlier reports issued in 2016 by EFCC and Department of State Services (DSS) on the same issue and in which Iseghohi-Edwards was cleared of any wrong doing.
Besides, the judge stated that the applicant, having been earlier investigated and cleared on the issue by EFCC and DSS, the respondents could not purport to issue another contrary countermanding investigative report five years later to contradict earlier final investigative reports and findings on the legal practitioner.
The judge, who described EFCC’s 2024 report as a contraption, an effort to stain the applicant and destroy his image, proceeded to issue an order voiding the report.
He found that there was no element of criminal or fraudulent allegation against the applicant in the earlier investigation reports of EFCC and DSS investigations.
Belgore held that there was evidence of a valid contractual agreement between the applicant and the Incorporated Trustees of ALGON, which was further confirmed by the series of judgements he tendered in court.
The judge said, “There were negotiated terms of engagement between the Incorporated Trustees of ALGON and the applicant. These terms of engagement were renegotiated by parties in open court on September 15, 2016.”
Belgore held that the 10 promissory notes issued to the applicant in compliance with a valid order of mandamus made against the federal government by a Federal High Court, was validly issued by then President Muhammadu Buhari.
The judge, who faulted the AGF and EFCC for subjecting court judgements obtained by the applicant to their private investigation rather than taking steps to appeal, said it was also wrong of them to doubt the authenticity of the promissory notes issued by Buhari.
Belgore, who granted 20 out of the 21 reliefs sought in the suit, issued an order that the respondents and their agents, had no legal right to investigate purely civil matters already adjudicated by courts of competent jurisdiction, and such investigation of civil matters had infringed and was likely to further infringe on the fundamental rights of the applicant.
The judge also issued an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents and their agents, from criminalising and impugning the integrity of judgements and decisions of competent courts of record and from petitioning, questioning, further inviting, arresting, harassing, taking statements, impeding the movement of, harming, shooting, killing, charging, prosecuting, detaining and imprisoning the applicant in relation to the same issue of the London and Paris Clubs refunds.
Lawyer to EFCC, L. P. Apo, who commended the judge for the industry he deployed, said the 2024 report by EFCC, which claimed that the applicant obtained the judgements fraudulently, was made because Iseghohi-Edwards filed a suit in the United States of America against the Nigerian government to de-materialise the promissory notes.
The EFCC lawyer’s remarks aligned with the finding of Belgore that the 2024 report by the EFCC was only intended to taint the reputation of Iseghohi-Edwards.
Equally reacting, the applicant’s lawyer, Idumodin Ogumu, commended the judge and advised government and its agencies to always obey court’s decisions.
Alex Enumah
Follow us on:
