The appeal of imprisoned former House of Representatives member Farouk Lawan has been scheduled for a January 26, 2024, Supreme Court ruling.
Upon the attorneys for the parties submitting their last arguments and adopting their written papers on Thursday, a five-member panel chaired by Justice John Okoro select the date.
The appeal filed by Lawan, with the file number SC/CR/616/2022, aims to overturn the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Abuja on February 24, 2022, which condemned him to five years in prison and dismissed two of the three charges related to the corruption accusation the Federal Government had brought against him.
Read Also: Gabonese president’s ex-wife has been jailed
Despite the fact that the court was scheduled to hear his petition for bail while his appeal was being decided, it decided to take the main appeal instead of wasting time on the interlocutory application when the appeal was ready to be heard on its own.
While pleading with the court to consider the bail motion initially, Lawan’s attorney, Joseph Daudu (SAN), claimed that his client’s health was in danger.
Lawan has stage three prostrate cancer, according to Daudu, who also mentioned that there is no guarantee he will live if the disease progresses to stage four.
Yet, Daudu filed an application to withdraw the bail request after recognising that the court was not going to change its mind, at which point the first appeal was filed.
In his plea, Daudu asked the court to grant his client’s appeal and overturn the Court of Appeal’s decision.
A maximum sentence of seven years was imposed on counts one and two, which Daudu also mentioned the Court of Appeal absolved from.
The renowned attorney contended that the Supreme Court ought to release his client from the third count as well, since the Court of Appeal had the authority to release him from the first two charges, which he maintained had the same elements.
Federal Government attorney Bagudu Sanni urged the court to uphold the Court of Appeal’s decision and reject the appeal.
Lawan’s original seven-year maximum jail sentence was lowered to five years by the Court of Appeal in its ruling.
Lawan was found guilty on June 22, 2021, by a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court on three counts of soliciting, consenting to, and taking a bribe of $500,000 from businessman Femi Otedola.
Lawan was given seven years on count one, seven years on count two, and five years on count three by the High Court of the FCT in a June 22, 2021 ruling presided over by Justice Angela Otaluka.
Nevertheless, a three-member Court of Appeal panel presided over by Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, the court’s president, unanimously overturned Lawan’s conviction on counts one and two.
The prosecution’s case against them for agreeing to accept a $300 million bribe from Otedola was found to be unproven by the court.
In the lead judgement, Justice Dongban-Mensem observed that the investigators performed a poor job of reviewing call logs from the telecom provider to determine whether or not Lawan and Otedola had phone talks, as the complainant had stated.
She said, “Even though Lawan was alleged to have demanded and accepted a $300 million bribe from Otedola over the phone,” the detectives still needed to get hold of and review the call logs.
To support counts one and two, there is insufficient evidence. In relation to the charges listed in counts 1 and 2, there is a significant gap in the respondent’s (the prosecution’s) case against the appellant (Lawan). Beyond a reasonable doubt, the charges were not proven, the speaker stated.
Only the third count, which concerned the respondent’s acceptance of a bribe of $500,000, could be proven, according to Justice Dongban-Memsen’s ruling.
She pointed out that even the appellant acknowledged getting the $500,000 from Otedola in question.
Subsequently, the court found Lawan not guilty on counts one and two (where he was given a seven-year sentence for each count), but found him guilty on point three (five years).
Marked CA/ABJ/CR/495/2021, the ruling pertained to Lawan’s appeal.
The main decision was concurred with by panel members Mohammed Mustapha and Justice Peter Ige, who is currently retired.
