site logo

AWE ODESSA V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2005)

case summary

Court of Appeal (Kaduna Division)

Before Their Lordships:

  • MAHMUD MOHAMMED OFR, JCA
  • BABA ALKALI BA'ABA JCA
  • ABUBAKAR ABDULKADIR JEGA JCA
  • KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN JCA

Parties:

Appellant:

  • AWE ODESSA

Respondents:

  • FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
  • CHIEF JOSHUA CHIBI DARIYE
  • LAWSON A. OMOKHODION
  • DOROTHY UKO
  • DUATE P. IYABI
  • ALL STATES TRUST BANK PLC
  • ADONYE ROBERTS
  • OSIRWEMI SAMUEL
Suit number: CA/K/39/C/05

Background

This case pertains to the appeal by AWE ODESSA against the Federal High Court's ruling delivered on December 16, 2004, regarding charges under the Miscellaneous Offences Decree and the Money Laundering Decree. AWE ODESSA, along with several others, was initially charged, but the trial court ruled that the first accused person should be struck out following a preliminary objection concerning his immunity under Section 308 of the Nigerian Constitution. The appellant appealed against the continuation of the trial after the first accused was removed.

Issues

The principal issue in this case was whether the trial court's decision to proceed with the trial after striking out the first accused person constituted a denial of the appellant’s right to fair hearing.

  1. Was the trial considered to have commenced for the appellant, thereby allowing any claims of fair hearing?
  2. Did the trial court improperly deny the appellant fair hearing as mandated by law?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that:

  1. The trial of an accused person only commences when their plea is taken.
  2. An appellant cannot claim a denial of fair hearing if their case has not yet started in the legal sense.

Court Findings

The court found that:

  1. As the plea of the appellant for the charges in question was never taken, the trial on those specific charges had not commenced.
  2. Consequently, the appellant had not experienced a breach of their fair hearing rights since the trial had yet to begin.

Conclusion

The court concluded that the appeal was misconceived, affirming the trial court's actions since they were in alignment with legal standards and the appellant's rights had not been infringed upon. Therefore, the appeal was struck out.

Significance

This decision underscores the critical importance of recognizing when a trial legally begins and reinforces the principle that fair hearing rights are only applicable once the trial has commenced. It also highlights the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that procedural requirements are observed at all levels of criminal proceedings.

Counsel:

  • Prince A. A. Kayode SAN
  • Mr. C. Okoroma
  • Mr. P. Erokoro
  • Mr. D. O. Dodo SAN