N9bn contract scam: Court frees Bankole

An Abuja Federal High Court on Friday discharged
and acquitted a former Speaker of the House of
Representatives, Dimeji Bankole, after the
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
could not prove a 16-count criminal charge
bordering on a N9bn contract scam filed against
him.

Justice Evoh Chukwu, in a ruling on a no-case-
submission filed by Bankole after the prosecution
had called its witnesses, held that there was no
evidence linking the former speaker to the alleged
offences.
The EFCC had accused Bankole of perpetrating a
contract fraud, involving the purchase of two
Range Rover bulletproof vehicles; two Range
Rover vehicles (without bullet proof); three
Mercedes Benz S-600 cars; 400 units of DSTV
systems; 400 television sets; 800 units of desktop
computers; 100 units of Sharp digital copier; and
400 units of HP LaserJets 2600N.
The addresses presented by the companies which
executed the contracts for the procurement of the
items turned out to be false as well as other
information provided in their profiles.
The anti-graft agency alleged that most of the
purchases were contrary to Sections 17 to 56 of
the Public Procurement Act No.14 of 2007, and
punishable under Section 58(5) of the same Act.
With a private lawyer, Mr. Festus Keyamo,
prosecuting the case, Bankole was arraigned over
the 16-count charge, to which he pleaded not
guilty.
However, the trial proceeded with the prosecution
calling six witnesses, including officials of the
National Assembly, to testify.
After the prosecution had called its last witness,
Bankole, through his lawyer, Mr. O. Akoni, SAN,
filed an application for a no-case-submission,
asking the court to acquit and discharge him on
the grounds that the EFCC had not established a
prima facie case against him.
Ruling on the no-case-submission on Friday,
Justice Chukwu stressed that, in order to prove
the case against the former Speaker, the EFCC
must prove that the “accused person (Bankole)
colluded with the supplier or contractor to supply
at inflated prices.”
He held that the anti-graft agency was unable to
prove such. The judge further noted that
witnesses brought by the prosecution all admitted
that Bankole was not the chief accounting officer
of the House.
Justice Chukwu added that all the witnesses also
admitted that the contract for the purchase of the
controversial items followed due process.
He said, “All the witnesses told the court that the
procedure for the award of the contract followed
due process. None of them showed that the
accused person entered into a collusive
agreement with the contractors or their agents.
“The accused person does not own any of the
companies,” he added, citing the testimony of
some of the prosecution witnesses, who told the
court that investigations did not disclose that
Bankole was a shareholder, director or signatory
to any of the companies that benefitted from the
contract.
Continuing, the judge held that the prosecution
did not provide any evidence to prove that
Bankole benefitted from the contract.
“In the totality of the evidence of the prosecution,
there is nothing to show that the accused person
acted with intention to defraud – there is no
evidence to show that he selected the companies
that were awarded the contract.
“There is no evidence to show that any of the
companies were fronting for the accused person.
“There is no evidence to show that the accused
person was a director or a shareholder in any of
the companies.”
On January 31, 2012, a Federal Capital Territory
High Court headed by Justice S. B. Belgore, had
freed Bankole and his former Deputy, Ibrahim
Nafada, of a criminal charged involving an alleged
mismanagement of N38m.