An FCT High Court, Maitama, on Monday reserved judgment until June 29 in the alleged N5.9 million car gratification leveled against retired AVM Alkali Mamu.
The judge, Justice Salisu Garba, adjourned the case after listening to the submissions of the counsel in the matter.
Mamu, was a former Fleet Personnel Officer, Presidential Air Fleet; former Air Training Command, Kaduna, and member Committee for Procurement, Ministry of Defence.
The Economic and Financial Crime Commission ( EFCC ), on June 21, 2016, arraigned Mamu on a four-count charge bothering on receiving gratification.
The commission had alleged that Mamu collected a cash gift of 300,000 dollars and N5.9 million for the purchase of a Range Rover Evoque, as a member of Procurement and Planning Committee of Ministry of Defence.
EFCC also alleged that Mamu received two vehicles (Ford Expedition SUV and Jaguar XF Saloon) valued at N15 million and N12 million, respectively, from Societe D’ Equipment Internationaux Nigeria Ltd., a contractor with the Nigerian Air Force.
EFCC said the offence contravened Section 17 (a) of the Independent and Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000, and punishable under Section 17 (c) of the same Act.
Adopting his written address, Mr Joesph Daudu (SAN), urged the court to acquit Mamu because the prosecution did not prove the ingredient of the offence.
“Upon a review of the four counts, the prosecution did not prove any ingredient of the offence alleged against the defendant.
“The offence is not strict liability offence under the sections he was charged,” he submitted.
He added that the prosecution failed to call the alleged giver of the gift to testify in court against the receiver of the gift.
“That makes the foundation of the allegation to fail.”
He submitted that because money was found in someone’s account; means that it was a proceeds of a bribe.
He added that there was no nexus between the named giver of the bribe and the receiver, and should jettison the allegations and acquit the defendant.
He urged the court also to order that anything ceased from the defendant should be returned to him.
The prosecuting counsel, Mr Sylvanus Tahir, urged the court to go ahead and convict Mamu because the prosecution had made a prima facie case against the defendant.
He added that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
“Our argument is copiously stated in our final written address and we urged the court to carefully go through it” he submitted.
He urged the court to go ahead and convict the defendant.