21-day detention: Ex-NSA’s finance director seeks bail

The embattled former Director of Finance in the Office of the National Security Adviser, Mr. Shuaibu Salisu, has asked the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to release him on bail after 21-day in detention.

He said the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission(EFCC) has allegedly failed to accord recognition to his fundamental rights.

In the application filed by his counsel, Mr. A.U. Mustapha, the suspect said he had been in detention since November 20.

He said he was on his way to Zaria when he received a call from EFCC andhis respect for a lawfully constituted authority has turned into a nightmare.

The suspect alleged that he had not  been  arraigned in court, leaving his arrest and detention to cause danger to his health.

Mustapha said: “The defendant/applicant’s application for bail dated  December 7, 2015, was brought pursuant to Section 158(1) and 165(1) of the administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015; Sections 35(10, 36(5) and 36(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution  (as amended).

“The defendant/applicant herein prays that he be admitted to court bail pending trial of the charges preferred against him; and for such orders as the honourable court may deem fit to make it the circumstances.

“The application is supported by an eight-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Daniel Igbang, a litigation officer in the law firm of A.U Mustapha & Co., the law firm handling the suit for defendant/applicant. We humbly rely on all the averments to support this application.”

On issues of determination,  the lawyer said: “The only issue arising for the determination in this application is: whether the defendant/applicant is entitled to bail in the circumstances.”

He added: “The criteria to be followed in taking a decision on an application for bail as laid down in the case of Eyu vs. the State (1988) 2 NWLR (pt. 78) at page 206 include the following: the nature of the charge; the strength of the evidence which supports the charge; the gravity of the punishment in the event of conviction; the previous criminal record of the accused, if any; the likelihood of the accused interfering with witnesses  and the likelihood of further charges being brought against the accused.

“This decision has been followed in several other cases including the recent case of Dokubo-Asari vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2007) 12 NWLR (pt. 1048) at page 329, where the Supreme Court held as follows:

“When it comes to the issue of whether to grant or refuse bail pending trial of an accused by the trial court, the law has set out some criteria which the trial court is to consider in the exercise of its judicial discretion to arrive at a decision.”

“The courts have pronounced repeatedly that bail is a basic right of every citizen of this country, who is charged with a criminal offence by virtues of Section 35(1) of 1999 constitution.

“The courts have also upheld the presumption of innocence until proven guilty as guaranteed by Section 36(5) so that accused persons could enjoy the liberty guaranteed by section 35(4) of the 1999 Constitution; and that the onus is on the prosecution to prove that the accused person is not entitled to bail.”

No date has been fixed for hearing of the bail application.

Share this

Author : Unknown

Related Posts