$8.4 FIFA World Cup Fund: Court To Hear Appeal Motion Against Pinnick, Others March 29

$8.4 FIFA World Cup Fund: Court To Hear Appeal Motion Against Pinnick, Others March 29 By Our Reporter A Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja, will hear on March 29 a motion seeking an order to grant leave to appeal against the ruling that acquitted and acquitted Amaju Pinnick and others on a criminal charge brought against them. Judge Inyang Ekwo set the date after the plaintiffs’ attorney, Dr. Celsius Ukpong, informed the court of the motion for notice filed to that effect. The Chairman Board of Trustee of Professional Footballers Association of Nigeria (PFAN), Harrison Jalla, and an Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) staff, Tunde Aderibigbe, filed the motion with the lawsuit number FHC/ABJ/CR/ 93/2019. Others listed in the motion include the Federal Republic of Nigeria as complainant/respondent; Sanusi Mohammed, Seyi Akinwumi, Shehu Dikko, Amaju Melvin Pinnick as defendants/defendants, and Yusuf Ahmed Fresh. The duo, in the lawsuit dated December 16, 2020 and filed on the same date, requested “an order from the court granting permission to appeal as an interested party against the resolution of the honorable commissioned court No: FHC/ABJ/CR/93 /2019 discharging and acquitting the defendants in this matter.” They said the motion was filed on the basis that “on the day set for the arraignment, the applicants and other aggrieved persons were in court to testify after the arraignment. They argued that when the prosecutor who took over from the agency that filed the charge suddenly asked to drop the charge to study the file or whatever, only for the learned coroner to fire and acquit the defendants without a proper prosecution and trial. “The petitioners/interested party in the matter, in the public interest, took risks and made many sacrifices to come forward and gather much evidence to try the accused before they were finally charged in court. “The defendants have been using the trial court ruling as a successful shield against further prosecution in the matter that has yet to be tried. “Prosecutors have neglected/refused to appeal against this decision.” The petitioners, who stated that it was immaterial whether the prosecution was interested in prosecuting the matter or not, stressed that the matter should not end without a proper prosecution “where willing witnesses are not allowed to testify”. According to them, the prosecution cannot agree with the defense attorney to dismiss a charge and acquit the defendants regardless of the implications of such an agreement. “The interested parties/applicants were the nominal complaints and acted in good faith and in the public interest to reach the end of this trial where both parties are heard before the case is determined. “The complaint, referred to in Section 335 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act (ACJA), is the nominal complaint and not the prosecuting attorney. See FRNV.ONONYE 2018 LPELR-45067 “The allegations or the victims of the crime did not aggravate this crime to justify the prosecutor agreeing to drop the charge so that the defendants would have the right to acquittal. SEE LMP. NIG LTD. See FRN (2017) LPELR -43480(SC)”, they asserted. In the draft notice of appeal, appellants stated that they were dissatisfied with an FHC’s decision delivered by Justice Ojukwu on November 5, 2019, charge number FHC/ABJ/CR/93/2019, in which the defendants were released and acquitted. In their grounds of appeal, they argued that Judge Ojukwu erred in law when she held that the defendants had been released and acquitted for crimes that had not been tried. In addition, they also argued that the prosecution of the Attorney General’s Office took charge of the matter for the first time from Special Presidential Investigative Panel (SPIP) that presented the accusation and decided to aggravate the crime without resorting to the primary complaint that they were in court about to testify, and also face trial, among others. However, Judge Ekwo has set March 29 to hear the motion.