The Anambra State Government has voiced its objection to the trial of former governor Willie Obiano by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over an alleged N4bn fraud. Obiano faces nine charges, with the EFCC accusing him of diverting Anambra State’s security votes during his tenure as governor. While Obiano has been granted administrative bail, he is confined to Abuja, and the EFCC has been directed to deposit his travel documents with the court registrar. Anambra State Governor, Chukwuma Soludo, recently visited Obiano in Abuja and expressed optimism that the situation will resolve itself. Additionally, Obiano’s lawyer, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu SAN, informed the court that the state government has appealed against the EFCC’s authority to investigate and prosecute Obiano.
During the latest proceedings of the trial, Obiano’s lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), informed Justice Ekwo that the Anambra State government is contesting Obiano’s trial by the EFCC.
Ikpeazu informed the court about an appeal filed by the state government on March 3 challenging the EFCC’s jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Obiano.
He stated, “The charges relate to the accountability of security votes funds. The court lacks jurisdiction to entertain matters concerning the accountability of security votes funds. An appeal has been filed by the Anambra State Government challenging the EFCC’s powers to investigate the security votes of the state.
“The filing of the entire charge is done in bad faith.”
Ikpeazu also argued that there was no evidence from any witness indicating that Obiano issued directives for the disbursement of security votes and other state funds.
He said, “There is no evidence from any witness showing that the defendant issued directives regarding the disbursement of security votes and other state funds.
“The defendant cannot be held accountable for any alleged unlawful actions of Anambra State Government officials as there is no vicarious liability in our criminal jurisprudence.
“The prosecution’s conclusions are based on speculation and suspicion. The court has the inherent power to grant all the reliefs sought above.”
The trial was adjourned for the second time due to the defense’s inability to respond to the prosecution’s counter-affidavit. The matter has been adjourned until March 13.