The preliminary objection filed by a team of seven lawyers including two senior advocates of Nigeria (SANs) stopping the former managing director of the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Tony Attah and the head of legal Akachukwu Nwokedi has been thrown out by a Port Harcourt Chief Magistrate, Blessing Vic-Jumbo.
Handing down the ruling in Port Harcourt, Rivers State capital Monday, February 2022, the Chief Magistrate fixed February 24, 2022, for trial to begin.
She justified the summons that was issued to the NLNG, Attah and Nwokedi, saying the objection is misconceived to say that the case is not in compliance of the extant laws.
The complainants were represented in court on the day by Morrison Uzoma and C.A Jombo, while the defendants were represented in court by Charles Adekunle.
In the ruling that lasted for 27 minutes, the chief magistrate reviewed the history of the case and noted that despite many adjournments at the instant of a police officer, I. Obasi, asking for more time, the police that was duly served to investigate and report back to the court failed or refused to report back.
Instead, she stated, when the court went ahead to issue summons for criminal prosecution, the defendants filed preliminary objection. She summarized the objections to hinge on lack of jurisdiction by the court and lack of probable course of action as well as lack of compliance to the law on private prosecution.
The Chief Magistrate said the counter objection by the complainants answered those points. Stating her position on the matter, she said she warned herself not to go beyond preliminary objections. “The objections is misconceived to say the case is not in compliance. The objection lacks merit and is thus overruled”.
The counsel to the defendants (Adekunle) declined interview on grounds of not being permitted to talk to the press, but counsel to the complainants, Morrison Uzoma, said the ruling was a day of joy to distressed indigenous contractors that have been suppressed for decades in the hands of multinationals over contracts and their implementations.
He went ahead: “Instead of coming to face the charge, the NLNG, Tony Attah and Akachukwu Nwokedi brought a preliminary objection that the court has no jurisdiction on the premise that the contract is civil and that there ought to have been a conclusive police investigation before we would come to court.
“We replied that a civil transaction can give rise to a criminal complaint/element. We said there is a contract scam where Macobarb was absolutely misrepresented that he could proceed into a contract, and use his funds to sponsor it, that at the end of each milestone he would be paid and he would proceed to another level with the funds paid in the previous milestone. He was to raise invoice that was to be overseen by one Francis Dueller, the Contract Holder on behalf of the NLNG.’
He stated that Macobarb was asked to source for funds to execute the contract and he did. “He submitted invoice according to what he thought was the contract term, and proceeded to the next milestone. Now, pay him! NLNG did not.
“When he wanted to assert his right of payment, NLNG terminated the contract, and came back here to say it is a contract matter, a civil matter. Can someone hide under the civil contract procedure to commit and perpetuate crime? That is the question.”
The lawyer said what is very painful is that innocent institutions like the NNPC, Senate Committee on Gas, Rivers State House of Assembly, Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), and many others that Macobarb had at one time or the other approached via memos for peaceful resolution of this matter, the NLNG is saying that these bodies justified their action of not paying.
“They are the ones that dragged those big names to court in a criminal case. I have looked at the documents they filed to support their case and I did not see where the NNPC or any of those entities justified their action. What they have done is to bring those institutions into head-on collision with the Court, trying to preempt the outcome of the court ruling.”
He said what the court has said today is; “Look, you have a case to answer. Your objection is absolutely premature.’
He said, that is why he wondered on what basis they brought those institutions into the case. “How on earth did the AGF justify the actions of the NLNG They never did that. The court looked at everything. Thank God we did not bring up contempt charges against those entities. Thank God the AGF was not invited to come to court and explain why they justified those actions.
“The court is the last hope of the downtrodden. My client is a peace-loving person and had exhausted every avenue for peaceful resolution. They blocked all. Today, the court has said they should come to court and answer.’
Implication of ruling:
On the implication of the ruling, the lawyer (Morrison Uzoma for the complainant), said: “The implication of this is this; the preliminary objection that has been blocking the defendants from coming to face trial has been removed. Now, the objection has been removed, whatever that is stopping them from appearing in court has been removed. We expect them to enter the court for trial on February, 24, 2022.”
