S’Court Reserves Ruling In Union Bank’s Suit Against $15bn Judgment Debt …Queries Prosecutor’s Authority To Try Convicted Ex-Pension Director

The Supreme Court, yesterday, in Abuja, reserved ruling on a motion by Union Bank Plc seeking among others, leave to appeal against a June 5, 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeal in which the bank and three others were ordered to pay an oil and gas firm – Petro Union Limited – about $15billion.
A five-member panel of the apex court, led by Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad, after listening to arguments by lawyers to parties, said they would be informed when the ruling was ready.
Union Bank’s lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) while arguing the motion, said it contains nine reliefs, among which was an order for leave for extension of time to file appeal and another order for leave to appeal under Order 6 Rule 2(1) of the Supreme Court’s Rules.
Awomolo said his clients seek to raise fresh grounds of appeal and introduce new evidence necessary for a fair and just determination of the court.
He noted that it was strange that, while the judgments of the Federal High Court, Abuja (delivered on March 11, 2014) and the subsequent one by the Court of Appeal (which affirmed the Federal High Court judgment) were based on a £2.556b cheque alleged lodged in Union Bank by Petro Union, the said cheque was never tendered in court.
Awomolo said his client intends to show that Petro Union obtained both judgments by fraud.
He noted that Petro Union’s lawyer, Joe Gadzama (SAN) was only opposed to the grant of reliefs four and six out of the nine reliefs.
He urged the court to disregard the objection raised by Petro Union against his motion and prayed the court to grant his motion on the merit.
Olabisisi Soyebo (SAN) for the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Tijani Gazali (SAN) for the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Finance did not object to Union Bank’s motion.
Soyebo and Gazali, who said they did not file any process in relation to the motion, urged the court to grant it in view of the colossal amount involved and its possible implication on the nation’s economy.
Gadzama, in his response, said he vehemently opposed the motion factually and in law.
He urged the court to uphold the objection he raised and dismissed the motion on the grounds that Union Bank has not given valid and cogent reasons why leave should be granted it.
Earlier, the court finally resolved the dispute over who should represent Petro Union between Gazama and Onyechi Egwuonwu.
The court said, by its earlier ruling on July 6, 2021, it had found that Gadzama was the actual lawyer for Petro Union. It then barred Egwuonwu from further participating in the proceedings.
Petro Union had, in 1994 allegedly procured a cheque from a branch of Barclays Bank in the United Kingdom with a value of £2.556b wich it lodged in a Union Bank branch in Lagos under the pretext that the funds were to be used to construct three petrochemical refinery complexes and a bank in Nigeria.
On March 22, 2012, Petro Union sued at the Federal High Court, Abuja and sought, among others, an order of mandamus compelling the CBN, Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, Minister of Finance and the Attorney-General of the Federation to pay £2,556,000,000.00 to it.
In the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/M/104/2012 Petro Union claimed that the money was deposited with Union Bank in 1994n adding that Union Bank received £2,556,000,000.00 on its behalf and transferred £2,159,221,318.54 to the CBN while it retained £396,778,681.46 as commission.
The defendants – Union Bank, CBN, Minister of Finance and AGF – in their separate counter-affidavits, denied Petro Union’s claims.
But, in the March 11, 2014 judgment, Justice Adamu Abdu-Kafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja (now late) held in favour of Petro Union and their directors against the defendants.
Justice Kafarati held, among others, that Union Bank was liable to Petro Union in the sum of £396,778,681.46 being the balance of Petro Union’s foreign capital which it supposedly deposited with the Bank in 1994 and that the CBN was liable to the oil firm for the sum of £2,159,221,318.54.
The liabilities were held by the court to be joint and several against all the four defendants – CBN, Union Bank, Minister of Finance and AGF.
Out of the four defendants, only Union Bank and the CBN appealed the judgment of the Federal High Court.
On June 5, 2018, the Court of Appeal, Abuja gave judgment in the appeal by Union Bank and upheld the judgment by Justice Kafarati.
It is yet to determine the appeal by the CBN.
Similarly, the Supreme Court, yesterday, demanded from the law firm of Rotimi Jacobs and Co the fiat issued to it by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) to prosecuted John Yakubu Yusufu, who was convicted for diverting N24billion.
Yusufu, a former Deputy Director in the Federal Civil Service Pension Office, who is serving his six-year sentence, appealed to the Supreme Court to have the 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja set aside.
At the mention of the case, yesterday, Theodore Maiyaki announced an appearance for the appellant.
When Oluwaleke Atolagbe (from the firm of Rotimi Jacobs & Co) announced appearance for the respondent (the Federal Republic of Nigeria), a member of the court’s five-justices panel, Justice Centus Nweze sought to know if he (Atolagbe) was from the office of the Attorney General of te Federation (AGF).
Atolagbe said he is a private lawyer from, whose firm was instructed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to prosecute the case from the trial court.
Justice Nweze insisted that Atolagbe must present the fiat issued is firm by the AGF before further steps could be taken in the case.
When asked by the head of the panel, Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad, if he has the fiat with him in court, Atolagbe said no, but that a letter from the EFCC, authorising his firm to prosecute the case, was in the office.
In a ruling, Justice Muhammad said, although the court sympathised with the appellant (who Maiyaki said was currently in a correctional facility), further proceedings in te case would be suspended pending when the respondent produces the fiat issue on which basis it prosecuted the case.
Justice Muhammad then adjourned January 27, 2022 at the instance of the respondent.
Justice Abubakar Talba of the High Court of the Feral Capital Territory (FCT) had, in a judgment on January 28, 2013 convicted Yusufu on a three-count charge to which he pleaded guilty following a plea bargain agreement with the prosecuting agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Justice Talba had sentenced him to two years imprisonment on each count, with the option of N250,000 for each count, a decision the EFCC appealed.
In its judgment on March 21, 2018 the Appeal Court reversed the judgment of the High Court of the FCT and sentenced Yusufu to a cumulative six years imprisonment.
The appellate court then ordered to refund N22.9 billion to Federal Government’s coffers, a decision e appealed to the Supreme Court.
Although the Appeal Court’s judgment was given in 2018, Yusufu remained a free man until June 2020 when the EFCC arrest announced that its operatives arrested him in Gombe State.
He was later taken before Justice Hussein Baba-Yusuf of the High Court of the FCT, who on June 22, 2020 ordered him to be sent to prison to serve his sentence.