Alleged $6200,000 bribe: Lawmakers fault Lawan

Mr. Adams Jagaba, a prosecution witness in the trial of former House of Representatives member, Farouk Lawan has denied receiving the $620,000 bribe allegedly accepted from a businessman, Femi Otedola by Lawan.

He faulted the claim credited to Lawan, to the effect that he (Lawan) reported and handed him (Jagaba), with a covering letter, the $620,000.

Jagaba spoke on Wednesday while testifying as the 4th prosecution witness in Lawan’s trial before a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Lugbe, Abuja.

Lawan, an ex-Chairman of the House of Reps’ ad-hoc committee on Fuel Subsidy, is being tried on a three-count charge in which he is accused of collecting $500,000 out of the $3m bribe he allegedly requested from Otedola.

He is also accused of accepting the bribe in exchange for the removal of Otedola’s company’s name, Zenon Petroleum and Gas Ltd, from the list of firms indicted by the House committee for allegedly abusing the fuel subsidy regime in 2012.

Led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), Jagaba, a current member of the House of Reps, said he was the Chairman of the House Committee on Narcotics and Financial Crimes in the 2011-2015.

Jagaba, who is representing Kachia/Kagarko Federal Constituency of Kaduna State, said Lawan did not visit him (Jagaba) at about 3:00am on April 24, 2012 as claimed.

The witness, who read from the House’s Votes and Proceedings of April 24, 2012, earlier tendered by the prosecution, said, during the April 24 proceedings, Lawan only proposed an amendment of the ad hoc committee’s Recommendation 9, deleting items V and VI from the list of indicted firms.

He identified the two items to be the names of Otedola’s companies – Zenon Petroleum and Gas Ltd and Synopsis Enterprises Ltd – later removed from the list of indicted companies.

Asked to react to claim that Lawan visited him at about 3:00am of April 24, 2012 to report and submit the sum of $620,000 offered to the ad-hoc committee by Otedola as bribe, Jagaba said it was not true.

The witness said he was in his house between 1:00am and 9:00am of April 24, 2012, sleepy after taking his routine sleeping drug at 9:00pm the previous day.

He said: “My lord, the defendant was not in my house in the early hours of April 24, 2012.” He also denied Receiving  $620,000 from Lawan.

Jagab said: “I went to bed after 9pm after taking my drugs. I live alone in the house so nobody could have opened the door for him.

“By 10pm all gates of the estates were closed and would not be opened to anybody no matter how highly placed.

“My lord, I never saw or received such money from the defendant.The money is not with me. I cannot have what was not given to me.

Jagaba said: “I became aware on the defendant’s claim on the pages of the newspaper. I reserved my comment until I was invited by the police headquarters.

“I went to the police headquarters. On reaching there, I was confronted with a letter which I denied eve receiving.

“I requested from the police that I would love a situation when I would be with the defendant during interrogation.

“The police finally called the two of us. He was told that he had been saying a lot of things about me and he should repeat the claims.

“In his opening remarks, he said he was not saying that Hon. Jagaban was involved in the bribery scandal but that based on the advice of his lawyers that if I could accept the claims as chairman of House Committee on Narcotics and Financial Crimes it would help his case in the court and that the said money at that time would be considered as an exhibit not bribe.

“And I asked the defendant two questions before the police. One of the questions was ‘Honourable Farouk Lawan, did you give me the sum of $620,000?’

“Question two, ‘Hon. Frouk Lawan, is the same bribe money with me? He kept quiet. He didn’t answer any of my questions before the police.”

Jagaban added, “I did not receive any letter from the defendant. I did not receive the accompanying $500,000 from him. I did not discuss this matter with him at any point in time either in my personal or official capacity.

“My lord, we did not, as a committee or as a person receive such a committee from the defendant. In fact this is the second time of touching this letter.first it was when I was invited at Police headquarters, and the second time is now.

“My lord, I did not receive such letter, neither did I acknowledge the receipt of the letter. My lord I want to further add that the writer of the letter that wrote on the letter, ‘submitted by me’ with the signature of the writer.

“My lord, the convention is that it is the receiver of the letter that acknowledges. But in this case the writer acknowledged,” the witness said.

At the conclusion of Jagaba’s testimony, lead defence lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) cross-examined the witness briefly and sought an adjournment, which the trial judge, Angela Otaluka granted.

In an earlier ruling yesterday, Justice Otaluka rejected Ozekhome’s request to recall the prosecution’s 2nd witness, David Igbodo.

The judge said  having foreclosed  the defence from further cross-examining the witness due to alleged unnecessary delay, she no longer has the jurisdiction to reverse herself.

 She adjourned further proceedings to June 20.