Written by The Nationfont size 
The Federal High Court in Abuja will next Friday determine the fate of the alleged mastermind of the 2011 Christmas Day bombing at the St Theresa Catholic Church, Madalla, Niger State, Kabiru Umar (aka Kabiru Sokoto).
The court will on June 21 rule on the no-case-submission made by Umar at the completion of the prosecution’s case.
Justice Adeniyi Ademola chose the day yesterday after parties adopted their written submissions.
Defence lawyer, Ibrahim Umar, in his submission, argued that the prosecution had failed to produce insufficient evidence to link him with the charges of terrorism levelled against him. He urged the court to discharge and acquit him.
He further argued that the proof of evidence before the court did not link him to the crimes alleged against him.
He contended that the evidence so far led by the prosecution failed to establish any offence against him.
Umar argued that the evidence by all the six prosecution witnesses amounted to hearsay and urged the court to disregard them.
He contended that while the state accused him of “facilitating the commission of terrorist act by planting and encouraging some boys (now at large) at Mabira Sokoto, in Sokoto State with the intention to bomb the police headquarters and some other government agencies in the state,” the government failed to bring any of the boys he allegely planted and encouraged to testify against him.
He said rather than bringing the boys whom the operatives of the State Security Service claimed gave them information about how he encouraged them to bomb police headquarters and other government agencies in Sokoto, he said the Federal Government brought operatives of the SSS who came to the court to give hearsay evidence which has no probative value.
Umar argued that the prosecution failed to lead evidence to establish how he facilitated the commission of terrorist offence.
Umar also argued that although he was accused of withholding information about the plan to bomb the church from law enforcement officer, the prosecution failed to establish at what point he got hold of such information and at what point it became an offence for him not to have disclosed it.
Umar contended that all the witnesses that testified in the case wasted the time of the court as the evidence led were not credible to sustain the charge preferred against him.
He prayed the court to dismiss the two-count charge preferred against him.
In her counter-submission, prosecution lawyer, Mrs Chioma Onuegbu, stated that the state had sufficiently made out a prima facie against Umar.
Onuegbu asked the court to discountenance the defence lawyer’s submissions.
“It is my humble submission that, based on the testimonies of PW1 and PW2 and the exhibits before this honourable court, there is a prima facie case against the accused person that calls on him to give an explanation.
“At this stage, the credibility of the witnesses does not arise, the weight to be attached to the witnesses does not arise also,”Mrs Onuegbu argued.
No comments:
Post a Comment