The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has asked the Court of Appeal in Lagos to dismiss an appeal filed by the Chairman of Ibeto Energy Development Company, Cletus Ibeto, seeking to nullify the bench warrant issued against him by a Lagos State High Court in Ikeja.
The EFCC told the appellate court that the lower court had the power to order the arrest of the defendant notwithstanding that he filed a preliminary objection challenging its jurisdiction to try him.
Justice Ismail Ijelu of the Lagos State High Court in IKeja had, on November 3, 2023, ordered the defendant’s arrest after he failed to appear before the court on four different occasions to take his plea over an alleged N4.8bn fraud despite repeated hearing notices served on him.
The anti-graft agency had charged the defendant alongside his companies, Ibeto Energy Development Company and Odoh Holdings Ltd, with 10 counts, bordering on conspiracy, fraud, forgery and fraudulent use of documents.
However, dissatisfied with the order and the refusal of the court to hear his preliminary objection, the defendant filed a seven-ground of appeal before the appeal court.
The appellant, through his counsel, Wole Olanipekun, (SAN), submitted that his preliminary objection raised the issue of constitutional territorial and that it is of such a threshold nature that it demands to be heard and determined before arraignment.
He also contended that his client’s presence in court and his arraignment were not mandatory or preconditions for the hearing of a preliminary objection touching on the court’s jurisdiction, which was already ripe for adjudication.
The appellant, therefore, asked the appeal court to set aside or vacate the warrant of arrest and also strike out the suit before the lower court.
But the counsel for the EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs, (SAN), argued that it was only when the appellant appeared before the court and took his plea that the court could have jurisdiction to hear the case.
“It is clear that the lower court was patient with the appellant enough, but the appellant deliberately refused to appear before the court.
“It is, therefore, unfair for the appellant to argue that the lower court disregarded its record. The appellant and the other defendants delayed the proceedings by their deliberate refusal to attend the court’s proceedings,” Jacobs said.