The constitutional powers of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and the Minister for Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) has come to the fore recently with his alleged move to take over the trial of Delta State-born politician, Charles Umukoro, who is facing charges over the death of his wife.
The move stirred controversy when Jibrin Okutepa (SAN) refused the takeover in court and questioned the procedure adopted by the defence team in bringing up the matter.
The bone of contention between the prosecution and the defence is the procedure adopted in making the application, and the suspicion that the takeover will effectively stall the prosecution.
Umukoro was in May arraigned at an FCT High Court over the alleged murder of his wife, Louisa Eni Umukoro, a former director of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on April 21, 2016.
An autopsy report from the Department of Morbid Anatomy and Histopathology of the National Hospital in Abuja shows that the deceased died from ‘subdural hemorrhage’ resulting from two bruises on both sides of the neck, which the doctors said are products of ‘external force.’
The police concluded their investigation and filed a charge signed by Kenneth Ubanwa of the Legal and Prosecution Section at the Force Headquarters, stating that Umukoro caused the death of the woman by “hitting her on the head which caused internal hemorrhage with the knowledge that her death would be the probable consequence.”
While the office of the Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris charged Charles Eni-Umukoro with culpable homicide, which is punishable with death under Section 221 of the Penal Code, it authorized a private lawyer, Okutepa to conduct the prosecution alongside police lawyer, Stanley Nwodo Esq.
The case proceeded quickly and the defendant, who was remanded in prison custody pending the conclusion of the trial, had his bail application refused by the trial judge, Justice Maryanne Aninih.
However, on the day the prosecution intended to tender the audio recording and transcripts of the conversation between the deceased and her husband through the first prosecution witness and brother to the deceased, Engr Nosa Ukponmwan, the defence counsel, Peter Aihiokhai Esq. introduced A.B. Mamman as the counsel brought in from the AGF’s office to take over the case of the prosecutor.
While arguing that the AGF has the powers to issue a fiat and to take over any prosecution at any stage under Section 174 of the 1999 Constitution, Aihiokhai accused Okutepa of hijacking the prosecution from the IGP.
Okutepa asked the court to refuse the application made in the court becuase it is strange and did not conform to the due process of the law. The senior lawyer said neither himself nor the court received any letter from the police or the AGF to hands off the prosecution.
He said the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 and the verdict of the Supreme Court in Osahon vs FRN, had made provisions for private prosecutors for the Nigeria Police.
“Why would the defence insist on who should prosecute for the IGP?” Okutepa asked. “And why would the defence and the said prosecution counsel be in unholy alliance? So, this application is strange.”
Justice Aninih, however refused the application by the defence for the AGF to takeover the prosecution of the matter.
“No cogent reasons constituting sufficient grounds” was adduced, the judge ruled further that “if thereafter there is any relevant application necessitating the suspension of this matter, this court will definitely take cognisance of same,” she held.
The judge thereafter adjourned the matter to December 5 for continutation of trial.
