Court Rejects Fani-Kayode’s Bid To Transfer His Case To Abuja

The Federal High Court in Lagos, on Tuesday, rejected the application by former Minister of Aviation, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode to transfer his case to Abuja.

Chief Fani-Kayode is being tried for allegations bordering on fraud to the tune of N4.9 billion by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission [EFCC].

Ruling, the trial judge, Justice Rilwan Aikawa dismissed Fani-Kayode’s transfer seeking application for lack of merit.

Justice Aikawa faulted Fani-Kayode’s lawyer arguments that the cause of action leading to the case took place in Abuja.

He noted that parts of the alleged illegal transactions leading to the charge took place in Lagos.

Justice Aikawa cited the allegation by EFCC that Fani-Kayode paid N30 million cash to a printer, Olusegun Idowu as example.

He pointed that the office in question is at Igbosere which is in Lagos Island.

He also noted that based on Fani-Kayode’s request, the immediate-past Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, had earlier transferred the case.

The case was transferred from Justice Muslim Hassan of the same court to the present judge, who is also in Lagos.

The judge further argued that if the Chief Justice had found merit in the request to transfer the case from Lagos to Abuja, he would have done it earlier after Justice Hassan withdrew from the case.

Rather, he transferred it to another judge in Lagos.

In conclusion, he said:

“I am of the view that based on the facts and circumstances of this case, there is no justification for the transfer of this case to Abuja. The application lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.”

The case was adjourned till Wednesday for continuation of trial.

Fani-Kayode is standing trial for alleged N4.9 billion fraud alongside former Minister of State for Finance, Senator Nenadi Usman.

He is accused in his capacity as the Director of Publicity of ex-President Goodluck Jonathan’s presidential campaign organisation for the 2015 election.

The accused allegedly conspired with the others to directly and indirectly retain various sums, which the EFCC claimed they ought to have reasonably known were proceeds of crime.

The 17 counts pressed against them border on conspiracy, unlawful retention of proceeds of theft and money laundering.

The defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.

—