Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Ibori’s Release Dims as Court Adjourns Hearing Till June Next Year



The hope that the former Governor of Delta State, Chief James Ibori, will be released from prison in the United Kingdom this year, was dealt a serious blow on Monday as the court adjourned hearing on the confiscation of his assets till next year.
Ibori, who served as governor of Delta State from 1999 to 2007, was jailed by the Southwark Crown Court, London, in April 2012 for corruption.
Judge Anthony Pitts after listening to the prayers of four parties on Monday at the Southwark Crown Court, London, took what could be regarded as a ‘painful’ decision to adjourn the case which had been slated to commence that day to June 26, 2016.

His decision to adjourn the case was hinged on three notable grounds.
First, was the fact that if the case was allowed to proceed as scheduled, the six weeks initially planned for the hearing would not be sufficient to conclude it.
Argument started at about 2.21p.m. in court 8, when the prosecuting lawyer, Shasha Wass, told the judge that since Brandesh Gohil, Ibori’s former solicitor has another trial in January 2016, it would be logical for Gohil’s case to end before the present hearing, in which Gohil is also expected to testify.
Gohil who was also in court, but sat in the dock, only stood up when Judge Pitts categorically told him that since there was a new trial date to join him in Ibori’s case, there would be need for him to represent himself if the court finds out that he does not have a representation before next year.
The second premise was that of Udoamaka Onuigbo that was refused visa to appear before the court to give evidence on the benefits Ibori received which are still being contested by the Crown Court.
On the other hand, Ivan Krolick, pleaded with the judge to consider the fact that the time frame given to them to prepare their defence was too short and therefore asked the court for an extension of one week to enable his team prepare adequately for the hearing.
Based on those submissions, the court momentarily adjourned for about 20 minutes to decide on a common ground to hear the case.
However, Wass argument was that both Gohil, Udoamaka and Ibori’s cases should be heard at the same time, as that would give room for all the parties involved to say what benefits they received from Delta State.
Gohil is contesting his benefits, saying that he didn’t get as much as the Crown Court thought, while Udoamaka appealed on the grounds that she over paid what the Appeal Court had asked her to pay.

“Everything is based on corruption. Gohil relied on press article to make nine grounds of appeal. But his activity was investigated and documents found in his prison cell and computer revealed that there were concerted efforts made to pervert the course of justice.
“Gohil forged documents to avert his sentence. Therefore the issue of benefits being challenged by Gohil is that he is in the best place to know what he received, and he is not disadvantaged to do so,” Wass said.
Shortly after her submission, Mr. Kamlish, representing Gohil, told the judge that his client did not fabricate any document as presented by Wass.
He insisted that there was no evidence linking him to what she said, but because of the complexity of the case, “we submit that Gohil has no hand in what is being claimed. Therefore there is no way this case will end in six weeks time.”
Gohil’s appeal is expected to be heard in January 2016 at the Southwark Crown Court.
But Udoamaka’s lawyers, Mr. Ami Feder and Clare Leslie, argued that it would be practically difficult for Udoamaka to appear in the hearing because her visa application was denied.
“We have approached the UK Boarder Agency and told them the importance of the case, but no fruitful feedback. Except your honour can step in to intervene,” Mr. Feder said.
Udoamaka is also appealing an overcharge of £2.6 million she paid before her release in 2012.
Krolick, who had told the court that he had been instructed not to ask for an adjournment but seek to have at least one week extension, seems to be happy that an adjournment came rather unexpectedly.
He initially told Judge Pitts that he needed a week or 10 days to enable his team to go through the list the Crown would have used in the trial.
They asked the Crown to say categorically which area, index or direction they would base their case on because dealing with 66,000 pages would be an enormous task.
Krolick insisted that if the hearing had continued, they had made preparation based on the document they already have, and that they have not had enough time to go through the bunch of documents received from the prosecuting team due to short notice received from them.
“This is not our fault because you told the prosecuting team to provide us copies in February. That was not done until a week before the trial. We worked hard to get something done, but we haven’t had enough.
“The fact is that this is not a straight forward case. I want to emphasise that I don’t want to seek further adjournment in this case,” Krolick said.
But Wass however told Judge Pitts that the material Krolick described was not new at all and that it has been before the court but was simply put in bundles.

“This is entirely fanciful to say it is new. They have spent £2millon working on Ibori’s case. There is a composite bundle for each defendant and not the entire bundle. If this case is adjourned, it will cost the public a huge amount of money. If you adjourned the case, it becomes a manipulative practice by defendants to use,” Wass told the judge.
Having looked at the entire scenario, Judge Pitts then said there was need to consolidate Gohil and Ibori’s cases and run them concurrently.
ThisDay Reports

No comments: