NAIRAMETRICS
The Federal High Court in Abuja has granted N100 million bail to a former Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN), Mr. Gimba Kumo Yau, who is accused of allegedly awarding a $65,000,000 real estate contract to an allegedly incompetent firm, Good Earth Power Nigeria Limited, in 2012.
Justice James Omotosho granted N100 million bail each to Yau and co-defendants Bola Ogunsola and Mr. Tarry Rufus on Wednesday, in the matter filed by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission‘s (ICPC) lawyer, Dr. Osuobeni Ekoi Akponimisingha, in the charge sheet marked FHC/ABJ/CR/333/24.
Good Earth Power Nigeria Limited and T. Brend Fortunes Limited were also joined as defendants, having been sued for their alleged contravention of the Public Enterprises Regulatory Commission Act and Section 19 of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
Facts of the case
- In ICPC’s five-count charge, the anti-graft agency accused Yau of making payment to Good Earth Power Nigeria Limited in the sum of N3,785,000,000.00 out of the total contract sum of $65,000,000 for the development of 962 units of residential housing in Kubwa, Abuja, named “Goodluck Jonathan Legacy City,” contrary to accepted practice.
- The ICPC maintained that the former bank CEO allegedly contributed to his organization’s failure at the time by approving $65,000,000 to a firm that could not carry out and complete the real estate project.
- The allegations stated that Mr. Gimba Kumo Yau and Bola Ogunsola, in their roles as chief executive officer and executive director of the bank in August 2012, had secured a loan of N14 billion from Ecobank Nigeria PLC on behalf of the bank.
- This loan was said to be earmarked for the development and completion of 962 residential housing units in Kubwa, Abuja, named “Goodluck Jonathan Legacy City,” within 18 months.
- ICPC further alleged that Mr. Gimba Kumo Yau, as the bank’s CEO, awarded the $65 million contract despite knowing that the company lacked the capacity to carry out the contract.
- ICPC added that the project remains incomplete as of today, thereby amounting to “economic adversity” for the bank and in violation of Section 68(1) of the Public Enterprise Regulatory Commission Act, CAP P39, Laws of the Federation, 2004.
- The other defendants were accused of giving and receiving $3,550,000.00 of the contract sum in cash in contravention of the Money Laundering Act.
- When the charges were read out to the defendants in open court, they had pleaded not guilty.
- Subsequently, their legal team applied for bail.
What transpired in court
- The defendants had argued that bail is at the discretion of the court and that the applicants are entitled to bail, being presumed innocent under the law.
- They also assured that their clients would not jump bail when granted bail, as one of the defendant’s counsel also submitted that the charge against his client is not one punishable by death.
- On the part of the ICPC counsel, he did not oppose the applications for bail.
- Ruling on the bail applications on Wednesday, Omotosho held that bail is premised on the presumption of innocence, which an accused person enjoys until he is declared guilty by the court.
