Nenadi Usman and Fani Kayode’s alleged N4.9billion naira fraud case leveled against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) before Justice Rilwan Aikawa of the Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos was on Tuesday, October 2, 2018 adjourned.
The case was adjourned to November 16, 2018 for ruling on an application for stay of proceedings filed by a former Minister of State for Finance, Nenadi Usman, in a N4.9bn fraud case. .
According to the EFCC, Nenadi Usman who was a one time Minister of State of Finance, is standing trial alongside a former Minister of Aviation, Femi Fani-Kayode and a company, Joint Trust Dimensions Limited, on a 17-count charge bordering on money laundering to the tune of N4.9bn.
The anti-graft Commission explaining the case, said at the resume hearing on Tuesday October 2, 2018, the counsel to the first defendant (Nenadi), Ferdinand Orbih, SAN, told the court that he had a motion dated May 2, 2018 before the court for stay of proceedings. .
He further told the court that the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, must appear before the court. He said:
“Having reached this stage, my Lord, we cannot continue with the proceedings.
“The Minister of Information and Culture is a Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and he made some pronouncements and publications against my client, whom he described as one of the looters. .
“That he has told the world that she is a looter, then, the substantial trial must stop, ” he stated.
He further stated that the allegation was published in both the Vanguard newspaper of April 1, 2018 and The Punch newspaper of April 2, 2018 respectively.
However, in his response, the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, opposed the application, saying ” My Lord, this is a parasitic application. It has no bearing to this case. There is a procedure for seeking redress. ”
He also told the court that the contents of the affidavit were not in sync with the attached exhibits.
“My Lord, this is a naked application. It is a mere allegation .
“Before the application, the allegations against the defendant was already in the public domain. .
“There was no advertorial from the Ministry of Information and Culture. .
“The reports were published by different newspapers”. He said.