N1.162bn Fraud: Court Adjourns Dariye’s Trial to April 27

Spread the love

Justice Adebukola Banjoko of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT High Court,
Gudu, has adjourned to April 27 and 28, 2017 for further hearing in the
trial of Joshua Dariye, a former governor of Plateau State.

Dariye is facing a N1.162 billion fraud charge preferred against him by the
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.

On March 16, 2017 his counsel, G.S. Pwul, SAN, brought an application
before the court, seeking to disengage himself.

Pwul had told the court that he had come to the decision “to withdraw
further appearance in court for the defendant”. He had argued that Section
36 (6) of the 1999 Constitution, provided for “the right of the defendant
to choose who will represent him in court”.

His argument was countered by Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, who averred that Section
349 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA 2015, which deals
with “non-appearance and non-representation of legal practitioner”, ought
to be considered as the guide in a criminal case.

In her ruling, Justice Banjoko said: “The balance of argument between the
ACJA 2015 and the 1999 Constitution is the Rule of Professional Conduct,
guiding the legal practitioner.”

Quoting from it, the trial judge noted that: “a lawyer shall not abandon or
withdraw an employment once assumed except for good cause”, adding that
ethically, a lawyer may withdraw from client’s employment, if there is
“conflict of interest between the lawyer and the client; where the client
insists on an unjust or immoral course in the conduct of his case; if the
client persists against the lawyer’s advice and remonstrance in pressing
frivolous defences; and if the client deliberately disregards an agreement
or obligation as to payment of fees or expenses”.

Giving an evaluation of Pwul’s argument, the trial judge noted that “this
application for disengagement was not based on the choice of the defendant,
but the choice of Pwul and so strictly speaking, the Constitution doesn’t
apply as it was counsel’s own voluntary decision to withdraw and not the
defendant”.

Justice Banjoko while acceding to his application, however, noted that
while Pwul complied with the rules by filing a motion on notice on March
17, 2017 “his grounds do not display any good reasons”.

“However, for overriding interest of justice, the court will accede as per
notice of withdrawal, and without further ado, ‘this horse’ is hereby set
free,” the judge held.

The judge thereafter, adjourned to April 27 and 28 to allow time for Dariye
to get a new counsel to represent him in court.