The Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja, on Thursday, granted the request of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to amend the charges filed against a former power minister, Dr Olu Agunloye.
Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie allowed the amendment while ruling on the defendant’s objection filed by the prosecution on June 25, 2024.
Justice Onwuegbuzie, after reviewing the affidavit in support of the motion for amendment, held that the court was convinced to permit the amendment.
Following the permission, the court adjourned the case to February 3, 2025, for Agunloye’s re-arraignment on the amended charges.
Agunloye is facing a seven-count charge filed by the EFCC in a suit marked FCT/HC/CR/617/2023.
The charges relate to forgery, disobedience of a presidential order, and corruption concerning the Mambilla power plant project in Taraba State.
The EFCC alleged that on May 22, 2003, Agunloye awarded a contract titled “Construction of 3,960MW Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Station on Build, Operate and Transfer Basis” to Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited without budgetary provision, approval, or cash backing.
The anti-graft agency further alleged that it traced suspicious payments made by Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited to accounts linked to Agunloye, who served under former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Agunloye, however, pleaded not guilty to the charges.
His counsel, Adeola Adedipe (SAN), on November 13, 2024, argued against the prosecution’s application to amend the charges.
Adedipe (SAN) contended that the amendment sought by the EFCC was an overreach.
He argued that introducing the name of Leno Adesanya into the amended charge contradicted a declarative judgment by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
According to Adedipe, Adesanya had acquired an enforceable declarative right under Section 287(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
He urged the court to reject the prosecution’s application, stating that no cogent or verifiable reasons had been provided for the amendment.
EFCC counsel, Abba Muhammed (SAN), however, argued that the application to amend the charges was brought pursuant to Sections 216(1) and (2) and 217 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.
Muhammed urged the court to grant the EFCC’s prayers, which included the leave to amend the charges against the defendant and permission to serve the amended charges on the defendant.
In his ruling, Justice Onwuegbuzie held that the court has the discretion to permit the alteration or amendment of charges at any stage before judgment is delivered.
He stated that under Sections 216 and 217 of the ACJA, 2015, the prosecution could amend charges without seeking permission, provided the amendments complied with the law.
Contrary to the defendant’s claims, the judge ruled that the amendment was not intended to overreach or prejudice the defendant.
“The stage at which the prosecution is amending the charges still provides the defendant with an opportunity to present his defence.
“The matter is still at the stage of examination-in-chief of the prosecution, and the defence stage has not been reached.
“It is my humble view that the amendment is not intended to overreach the defendant or cause injustice to him,” Justice Onwuegbuzie said.
