OPL 245: EFCC lawyer rejects bribery claim, insists case lacked requisite evidence

Offem Uket, the prosecutor, in the OPL 245 case involving Mohammed Bello Adoke, former attorney-general of the federation (AGF), says he did not receive a bribe to compromise the suit.

In a ruling delivered on March 28, Abubakar Kutigi, judge of the federal capital territory (FCT) high court, Abuja, upheld the no-case submission by the defendants in the matter and dismissed the charges.

The judge also chided the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for wasting four years on the trial without providing evidence.

After the ruling, reports surfaced online alleging that the commission had sacked its prosecutor for collecting bribes from Adoke and Wole Olanipekun, the lead counsel representing Aliyu Abubakar, the second defendant.

TheCable had previously reported that an EFCC source said the prosecutor was not sacked — but was out of contract.

The EFCC also denied the report alleging bribery by parties in the suit.

Dele Oyewale, spokesperson of the anti-graft agency, had asked the public to ignore “effusions of mischief makers on the matter”.

Reacting in a statement on Sunday, Uket said he handled the case with the utmost “ethical and professional standard”.

“I categorically deny that I was offered or I took bribes from Mr. Wole Olanipeku SAN and Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke to sabotage the trial of the defendants involved in the case, or that I had previously confided in colleagues of being pressured with offers of financial inducement from them in order to compromise the case or any other case for that matter,” the statement reads. 

“I have always strived to be ethical and professional in handling every assignment entrusted to me throughout my stay at the EFCC.

“It was the same ethical and professional standard that I brought to bear in prosecuting the case.”

Uket said he took over the case when the previous prosecutor left the EFCC in 2022.

“At the time of his departure, three witnesses had already been taken in the case pending at the FCT high court,” he said.

“On my part, I took seven other witnesses before being forced to close the case for the prosecution.

“I equally closed the prosecution’s case in one of the two cases pending before the federal high court after taking two witnesses in addition to seven witnesses that had earlier testified. 

“Having evaluated the evidence adduced by the ten witnesses who testified before the FCT high court, I rightly conceded that there was no evidence upon which to rely in urging the court to dismiss the no case submission made in respect of counts 1 to 5 out of the 40 counts contained in the charge. 

“I however urged the federal high court to dismiss the no case submission made on behalf of Messrs Mohammed Bello Adoke and Abubakar Aliyu, as they both have cases to answer. 

“In these cases, as in others, I had not acted unprofessionally and unethically as alleged but acted both professionally and ethically in discharging my prosecutorial responsibility in all the cases that were being prosecuted.”

The prosecutor also said the EFCC did not sack him, noting that he voluntarily opted not to renew his contract with the agency.

“Now, being a contract staff, whose contract was usually extended based on an application for such extension every year, I decided not to apply for a further extension and to allow it expire since the then subsisting contract was about to expire by effluxion of time on 31st January, 2024,” he said

“So, the issue of having been sacked or being denied contract extension on account of what transpired was untrue, as there was no such application before the EFCC.

“The summary of the foregoing is that I was never compromised and bribed by Chief Wole Olanipeku SAN, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke or any other person in that regard to sabotage the prosecution of the case.

“It is the joy of every prosecutor to win his case, not at all cost, but sometimes when requisite evidence is lacking, there is nothing anyone can do.”

He said the online publication “is an egregious and reprehensible effort orchestrated at tarnishing my character”. 

“The newspaper never sought my side of the story before it went on its besmirch expedition. I challenge it to show proof that it did,” the lawyer said.

“I demand a retraction and apology in like manner. I will give no further notice.”