Appeal Court Vacates Injunction against Kashamu’s Extradition 08 Jul 2013 By Davidson Iriekpen A three-man panel of justices at the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal has set aside an order of perpetual injunction granted in favour of a chieftain of the Ogun State Chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Mr. Buruji Kashamu. Justice Okechukwu Okeke (rtd) of the Federal High Court in Lagos had restrained the Attorney–General of the Federation (AGF) from making any order under Section 6(2) of the Extradition Act for the arrest, committal or surrender of Kashamu at the instance of the United States Government. Kashamu was indicated in a US District court for an alleged drug-related offences. The appellate court further vacated an order of perpetual injunction restraining the AGF from entertaining or making any order whatsoever in respect of any request by the US government for the surrender of the applicant in respect of the said alleged drug related offences. The unanimous decision of court setting aside the said orders was delivered by Justice Ibrahim Saulawa and was supported by Justices Joseph Ikyegh and Chinwe Iyizoba respectively. The decision was sequel to an appeal filed by the federal government challenging the decision of Justice Okeke delivered last March. In the appeal, which was argued on behalf of the federal government by Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), the federal government had complained that Justice Okeke erred in law by relying on hearsay and speculative evidence in granting Kashamu several reliefs including an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Nigerian government from entertaining any request from the US government on issue of drug related offence in the US. Kashamu had in one of the paragraphs in the affidavit supporting his summons alleged that “I was therefore surprised to be informed by a law enforcement officer, whose identity I must keep confidential for his security, on July 20, 2010 at about 9:a.m. in Lagos, that the US government had submitted a request at the offices of the respondent seeking my extradition on the basis of the very indictment I have applied to the US court to set aside and in spite of the judgments of the British courts mentioned above.” Holding that the appeal was meritorious, Justice Salauwa held that: “It is trite, that testimony, either oral or by way of an affidavit, by a witness or party who relates not what he knows personally, but what others have said, is generally unreliable, and inadmissible under the rules of evidence. “As a matter of general principle, no assertion offered as testimony (orally or in averment) can be relied upon by the court, unless it is or has been open to test by cross-examination. “And the reason being that such statements amounting to hearsay are either not made under oath, or are not subject to cross examination at all….From the very nature and circumstances of the instant case, there is every cogent reason for me to believe, that the allegations contained in the affidavit in support of the originating summons are a hoax, a smoke screen and rather a hearsay.” The appeal court also faulted the trial judge for allowing the case to be tried by way of originating summons despite the fact that the affidavit evidence in support of the case were highly contentious and hostile in nature. With this judgment, the US government is free to request for the extradition of Kashamu to answer charges for alleged conspiracy for unlawful importation of prohibited narcotics into the US.
Posted on: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:28:59 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015