Abuja: The failure of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to provide documents on Tuesday stalled the trial of the former Aviation Minister, Hadi Sirika, and others in an Abuja High Court.
Sirika is charged alongside his younger brother, Ahmad Abubakar and two companies, Al-Buraq Limited and Enginos Nigeria Limited, 10 counts bordering on abuse of office, criminal breach of trust, and use of position for gratification.
The anti-graft commission alleged that the former minister awarded various contracts to his younger brother, totalling about N19.4 billion.
The EFCC alleged that Sirika did confer unfair advantage upon Enginos Nigeria Limited, whose alter ego is his biological brother, Ahmad, by using his position to influence the award of a contract for the construction of a terminal building at Katsina Airport for the sum of N1,345,586,500.
The EFCC further alleged that the former minister used his position to influence the award of a contract for the establishment of the Fire Truck Maintenance and Refurbishment Centre at Katsina Airport for the sum of N3,811,497,685.
It also, among other things, alleged that Ahmad and Enginos Nigeria Limited had possession of the aggregate sum of N2,337,840,674.16, which they knew, indirectly, represented the proceeds of the former minister’s criminal conduct.
The offence, according to the EFCC, contravened the provisions of Sections 12 and 19 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.
Also, Section 17(b) of the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004, as well as Section 315 of the Penal Code Act, Cap 532, Acts of the Federal Capital Territory, is punishable under the same Acts.
The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred against them.
Earlier, the EFCC witness, Ganiyu Yesufu, the Director of Compliance at the Bureau for Public Procurement (BPP), was to be cross-examined by the defence.
Michael Numa, SAN, who held the brief for Kanu Agabi, SAN, Sirika ‘ s counsel, and for himself as counsel for (4th def) Enginos Nigeria Limited, was to cross-examine the witness.
Numa requested Exhibit C1 and annexure 2, which are the contract documents and approval letters, but the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, did not have them.
Numa told the court that the prosecution promised to produce annexure 2 at the last adjourned date.
Jacobs told the court he does not have it and that Numa should proceed without it.
Numa told the court that he cannot proceed with the cross-examination without the document he asked for, as his questions will centre on it.
After an argument between the parties, Jacobs prayed the court for an adjournment to enable them get the document.
In a ruling, Justice Belgore asked the prosecution to make the document available to the defence so they could continue cross-examining the witness.
He then adjourned until March 25 for the prosecution to produce annexure 2 and to continue the cross-examination of PW.