Fintiri, ex-Adamawa governor, remanded in prison over ‘N2.9bn fraud’

Ahmed Mohammed, justice of the federal high court, Abuja, on Thursday remanded Umaru Fintiri, former Adamawa state governor, in prison pending the determination of his application for bail.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had arraigned Fintiri and Mayim Construction and Properties Limited before the judge on a five-count charge of money laundering to the tune of N2.9bn.

Fintiri, a former speaker, who also served briefly as the acting governor of the state, allegedly laundered money through his naira and dollar accounts domiciled at Ecobank Plc, and made a large cash payment for the purchase of a piece of property at Plot no 7, Gana Street , Maitama, Abuja.

Count four of the charge reads: “That you, Ahmadu Umaru (Alias Rt. Hon. Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri) and Mayim Construction and Properties Limited on or about the 9th October 2014 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did indirectly disguise the origin of the aggregate sum of N550,000,000 (Five Hundred and Fifty Million naira) through a term loan of twelve months purportedly granted to you by Ecobank Plc for the acquisition of a tea plantation farm from Nigeria Agricultural Bank in Taraba State which loan you repaid within three months as acting Governor of Adamawa State from sum which you know form part of proceeds of unlawful act to wit: corruption and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15(2)(a) of the Money laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 as amended in 2012 and punishable under Section 15(3) and (4) of the same Act.”

Upon the reading of the charges, the first defendant, Fintiri pleaded not guilty, while a plea of “not guilty” was also entered for Mayim Construction and Properties Limited, pursuant to the provisions of Section 478 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.

In view of the pleas by the accused, counsel to the EFCC, Aso Larrys Peters, requested for a date for commencement of trial, and that the defendant be remanded in prison custody.

However, counsel to the first and second defendants, Mahmud Abubakar Magaji (SAN), informed the court that he had a pending motion dated June 24, and filed on June 27 seeking the release of the defendant on bail.

This was opposed by the prosecution who noted that the motion, which represented just the first defendant, sought to remove the second defendant from the matter.

“This is a criminal trial and it is fundamental that all processes before your lordship carries the appropriate parties. We have not amended the charge and your lordship has not ordered us to do so. The motion filed by the defence is a deliberate attempt to amend the charges, confuse and frustrate court processes,” Peters argued.

Referring to precedents, the prosecution requested that the court discountenance the application, describing it as incompetent.

However, his objection was overruled.

Consequently, the defence moved its application.

In his argument, Magaji stated that since the prosecution had deposed to a six-paragraph counter affidavit to the effect that investigations into the matter had been concluded and  the defendant had been on administrative bail of the EFCC, the defendant was not likely to jump bail and would always be available for trial.

The defence further presented exhibit MAM1 to the effect that the defendant was physically unwell.

Again, the motion was opposed by the prosecution, who pointed out that the exhibit MAM1 tendered alongside the defence’s motion claimed that the defendant went for a physical examination on June 9, and was diagnosed with heart-related ailments and hypertension.

By this, the prosecution noted that, “It doesn’t follow that results of tests can be issued before a consultation. On that date, the defendant was in the custody of the EFCC and only released by June 15, on administrative bail.

“Somebody is lying under oath. If your lordship grants bail, we are not sure that this matter will continue,” Peters submitted.

He urged that the discretion of court should be exercised judiciously based on material evidence before the court.

Thereafter, Justice Mohammed adjourned to Friday for ruling on the bail application and ordered that the defendant be remanded in Kuje prison.