BNW

B N W: Biafra Nigeria World News

NEWS Tuesday, November 02, 2004                        HOME       ABOUT US       SUBSCRIBE       MEMBERS       CONTACT US   NEWS National Metro Africa World Business OPINION Editorial Columnists Contributors Letters Cartoons Discussions Outlook SPORTS Home Abroad Golf Weekly Results FEATURES Focus Policy & Politics Arts Media Science Natural Health Law Education Weekend Friday Review Executive Briefs Fashion Food & Drink Auto Wheels Friday Worship Saturday Magazine Sunday Magazine Ibru Ecumenical Centre Agro Care   Govt files 15-count charge against Naval chiefs By Alex Olise and Emmanuel Badejo THE court-martial of three top Naval officers over the missing oil bunkering ship, MT. African Pride, continued in Lagos yesterday. A 15-count charge was read against the accused persons. The first accused, Rear Admiral Francis Agbiti, the then Chief of Training and Plans, was slammed with a four-count charge. The offences read: count one: conspiracy to commit felony contrary to section 114 (1) AFA Cap A20, LFN 2004 and punishable under section 516 of the Criminal Code Act Cap C41 LFM 2004. The particulars of the charge noted that between February and August 2004, "Agbiti conspired with Rear Admiral Bob-Manuel and Rear Admiral Kolawole and other persons unknown to facilitate and or effect the disappearance of vessel MT. African Pride from lawful custody of the Nigerian Navy." "that Rear Admiral Agbiti as Chief of Training and Operations at the Naval Headquarters, Abuja, between January 21 and August 10, 2004 failed to ensure compliance with the order of the Chief of Naval Staff (CNS), Vice Admiral Samuel Afolayan, conveying the directive of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that all arrested vessels, inclusive of MT. African Pride, under the custody of the Nigerian Navy should be handed over to the Nigeria Police Force." The particulars added that the accused on February 17 at the Naval Headquarters, Abuja, wrongfully caused the release of a signal DTGM 17/11 8th February 2004 which led to the non-compliance with the CNS order that all arrested vessels, inclusive of MT. African Pride under the custody of the Navy should be handed over to the police. The last of the charges was that sometimes in September 2004, Agbiti lied to the CNS that he did not authorise the signal, DTGM, 17/11 8th February 2004 which ran contrary to the order of the CNS that all arrested vessels, including MT. African Pride in custody of the Nigerian Navy should be released to the Nigeria Police Force. Still, another was that Agbiti sometimes in September 2004 gave the CNS the impression that the vessel MT. African Pride had been released to the Nigeria Police Force, knowing full well that it was not true. The last charge against Agbiti was that in June 2004, he fraudulently made alterations to a previous minute on incoming mail with reference number HWMC 077/101/Vol.155 dated June 2004. Rear Admiral Anthonio Bob-Manuel was charged with conspiracy to commit felony contrary to section 114 (1) AFA Cap A20, LFN 2004 punishable under Section 516 of Criminal Code Act Cap C41 LFM 2004. This offence brought the three accused together, the second charge against him read that between February and July 2004, he failed to brief the CNS of any existing constraint, which hampered the handing over of MT. African Pride to the Nigeria Police Force as ordered by the CNS. The third charge was his disobeying the CNS to ensure hand-over by all Naval Commands all arrested vessels, including the MT. African Pride. Also, Rear Admiral Samuel Kolawole had a six-count charge preferred against him. They are the following: "Conspiracy to commit felony contrary to Section 114 (1) AFA Cap A20 LFN 2004 and punishable under Section 516 of the Criminal Code Act Cap C41 LFN 2004. The particulars of offence are that: R. Adm SB Kolawole as FOC West between July and August 2004 conspired with R/Adms AI Bob-Manuel and FE Agbiti and other persons unknown to facilitate and or effect the disappearance of MT. African Pride from lawful custody of the Nigerian Naval. The second count is: Conduct to the prejudice of service discipline contrary to Section 103(1) AFA Cap A20 LFN 2004. The particulars of offence are that: R Adm SB Kolawole, as FOC West between July and August 2004 in Lagos, granted permission to some Russian embassy officials to visit MT. African Pride, a vessel arrested for illegal lifting of crude oil and under Naval custody without first notifying and seeking approval from Naval Headquarters, Abuja." Alteration of service document contrary to section 90 (b) AFA Cap A20 LFN 2004. Particulars of offence are that: Adm SB Kolawole as FOC West between August 2004 and September 2004 in Lagos, altered the written directives in HWNC: 07/101/Vol.1V as folios 19 and 25 respectively, which you issued to the Chief Security Officer (CSO), Commander M. Ajadi, concerning Russian Embassy officials' visit to MT. African Pride knowing the new content of the document to be false, or calculated to give false impression that you gave a directive to enhance the proper procedure of granting access to persons on board a vessel under the custody of the Nigerian Navy. Count four: Neglect to the prejudice of service discipline contrary to section 103(1) AFA Cap A20 LFN 2004. Particulars of offence are that: Adm SB Kolawole as FOC West between August 2004 and September 2004 in Lagos, neglected to take proper charge of the security of MT. African Pride thereby providing the enabling environment for the escape of the vessel under your custody. Count five: False evidence contrary to Section 101 (1) AFA Cap A20 LFN 2004. Particulars of offence are that: R. Adm SB Kolawole as FOC West between August 2004 and September 2004 in Lagos, as a witness before a Board of Inquiry (BoI) constituted by the FOC West made statement to the effect that Naval Headquarters permission was required for the visit of Russian Embassy officials to MT. African Pride and that you so directed our CSO knowing it to be false. Count six: Loss of public property contrary to Section 68 (1) of the AFA Cap A20 LFN 2004. Particulars of offence are that: R. Adm SB Kolawole as FOC West sometimes in August 2004 lost a vessel MT. African Pride being a property (prize ship) belonging to the Federal Government of Nigeria, which had been entrusted unto your care as FOC West. The charges were signed by the prosecutor, Brig.-Gen. Donatus Idada Ikponmwen (rtd). The three pleaded not guilty to all the charges. After the charges were read, the prosecutor addressed the court after which he called the first witness, Commodore Sunday Lawal Bafe, Director of Signals, Naval Headquarters, Abuja, who worked directly with Read Admiral Agbiti, testified. Its evidence went thus: Can you briefly tell this court who you are as well as your duties in the Nigerian Navy? I am Commodore Sunday Lawal Bejeh, Director of Naval Signals, Headquarters, Abuja. I am responsible for the training and operations regarding communications. I advise on the control, maintenance, training of communication officers and ratings. I liaise with communication organisations, including Nigeria Communications Commission, Ministry of Communications on behalf of Nigerian Navy. Can you take your mind back, starting from 8th of October, 2003 up till now. Did you record any experience particularly as it relates to your official function in the Nigerian Navy and in connection with the MT. African Pride? Regarding the issue relating to MT. African Pride, there was a signal, which was sent from FOC to the headquarters. Thereafter, Rear Admiral Agbiti sent for me to raise a signal (letter) for the ship to be released on the ground that the ship had valid documents. After a while, the Ministry of Justice, through its permanent secretary sent another signal to me stating that the ministry wanted to know where the ship was located for further action. The letter was dated February 17. After the receipt of this signal, again, Rear Admiral Agbiti called me to his office and told me that there was a signal, which the Police were dangling all about. He said that I endorsed the said signal and he ordered me to look for the signal anywhere it could be found. At this point, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), counsel to Agbiti, the first accused, objected. He said that he had been served with the written voluntary statement of the witness. He expressed surprise that some of the evidence being given by the witness were not contained in the statement served on him. But the prosecution opposed Olanipekun's position, saying that the accused persons were only entitled to the summary of evidence and not the details as canvassed by the defence. He added that he had met that condition. He also said that there were differences in criminal proceedings and a court-martial, adding that he did not see why the proceedings should be hindered at all. But Olanipekun maintained that the new charge sheet was very deceitful, saying they knew the earlier charge sheet but the one brought in and circulated yesterday morning was not known to them. He said the conspiracy charge was not in the last charge sheet. Commenting on the earlier submission of the government's lawyer, Olanipekun said there was a difference between summary and abstract evidence. He said while summary evidence gives room for the accused to personally appear in the matter, abstract evidence could be taken in the absence of the accused. He then said that with the position of things, they were handicapped to properly cross-examine the witness. The immediate past Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) President added that once the accused were ready to go on with the matter, it was mandatory that all their evidence to be used against them must have been served on the accused at least 24 hours before the continuation of the trial. Olanipekun added that they were entitled to fair hearing. Replying, the prosecution said that the standard of fairness in the military could not be said to be the same with that of civil case. Since October 18, 2004, the summary evidence, which the defence were now contesting, had been taken and signed by the accused. And now that the witness was already giving his testimony in the hearing of the accused and their counsel and if at the end of the day, they wanted more time, then, the court could grant them so as to react to the evidence. At this point, the court overruled the objection raised by the defence and ordered the witness to continue.`       BUSINESS SERVICES Property Appointments Money Watch Market Report Capital Market Business Travels Maritime Watch Industry Watch Energy Report Insurance Compulife � 2003 - 2004 @ Guardian Newspapers Limited (All Rights Reserved).  Powered by dnetsystems.net dnet�   BNW News Voice of Biafra | Biafra World | Biafra Online | Biafra Web | MASSOB | Biafra Forum | BLM | Biafra Consortium           © 2001 BNW BiafraNigeriaWorld  Privacy Policy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Powered by ACENetwork ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------    Axiom PSI Yam Festival Series, Iri Ji Nd'Igbo the Kola-Nut Series,Nigeria Masterweb Norimatsu | Nigeria Forum | Biafra | Biafra Nigeria | BLM | Hausa Forum | Biafra Web | Voice of Biafra | Okonko Research and Igbology | | Igbo World | BNW | MASSOB | Igbo Net | bentech | IGBO FORUM | HAUSA NET (AWUSANET) | AREWA FORUM | YORUBA NET | YORUBA FORUM | New Nigeriaworld | WIC: World Igbo Congress