Trial Of Ex-Governors: Onabanjo Rejects Verdict
Chief Onabanjo the ex-governor of Ogun state who was found guilty by the Lagos zone special military Tribunal, made a spirited speech rejecting the verdict of the Tribunal before sentence was passed on him.
With regard to the proceedings as soon as the tribunal pronounced that he was guilty as charged, and was asked to say something in mitigation of punishment, Chief Onabanjo said:
"I have looked at the decree, it does not allow for any mitigation of sentence, except for what has been stated. "Naturally I don't think that you would expect me to accept your verdict of guilty. If evidence had been given in public it may have been different. That it was held in camera I found it satisfactory.”
"You said my responses to the prosecution were 'mere comments,' I have spent about 35, 36 years in public service and on no occasion had I been brought to law court on a charge or charges of dishonest conduct.
"I thank you, chairman and others for the courtesies you extended to me which, normally, one would not
"The record is there. Of all the vices expect. that have been put at my door, none of these accusers has called me 'untruth- ful,' I can say that without fear or favour.
"If in my defence you were helpful, other law enforcement agencies did not make it easy for me to defend myself. Although I accept your verdict and history and God will give its own
"In 1976, I went for an operation after which I was persuaded to run for verdict." public office. I accepted the challenge in order to serve my countrymen.
"I am still not a healthy man. "I want to stress that the charge is one that is retrospective. I have not gone out of my way to infringe on the law of the country. I have been Governor of Ogun State for the past five years and nothing has been raised against me.
"I kept strictly to the oath of office and the law of the land what you considered is outside my duties as Governor of Ogun State.
"I know that your hands are tied by the decree, but you are allowed to make recommendations for mitigation of your sentence.
"I spent about 40 years in the service of this country. I urge you to exercise the right which you have as provided by the decree.
"In a case like this, may be if I had been represented by a counsel it would have been different. I am not a counsel and I represented myself.
When ex-Governor Onabanjo finished his address, the tribunal rose for one hour, before pronouncing sentence. On its resumption Brigadier Omu asked that ex-Governor Onabanjo be brought to the witness box. He enquired about the accused record and he was told no record of imprisonment.
Brigadier Omu then pronounced that Chief Onabanjo should spend the next 22 "calender years" in jail.
In the tribunal's review which preceded the sentence Brigadier Omu described Chief Onabanjo's evidence in the trial - as "untruthful". Hhe is the nerve centre of the deal that enriched UPN illegally. The tribunal and he was told there was no record of the case against the first accused Chief Bisi Onabanjo
On the second and third accused, namely ex-Governors Michael Ajasin and Bola Ige, the tribunal held that there was no evidence on which to find them guilty.
Two not proven, one guilty?
It is being suggested that the verdict delivered by the Special Military Tribunal in Lagos on the three ex governors, gives the lie to speculations that the proceedings of the Tribunal will not be free and fair.One can safely assume that it is the acquittal of the two ex-governors that is being cited as evidence of the Tribunal being 'fair and free'.
Even two of the 'corrupt politicians' have been acquitted and discharged, who says our tribunals won't be free and fair, the argument goes.
That is precisely where the problem lies. To start with, Chief Bola Ige and Chief Adekunle Ajasin were taken from the Tribunal room straight back to the prison they had been brought from, in spite of their having been acquitted and discharged! If a man cannot expect to be released from custody after having been acquitted, of what use is the acquittal to him?
Beyond that, whatever has happened to the unequivocal assertion that the three former governors had admitted receiving kickbacks "amounting N2.8 million from Bouygues Nigeria Limited and Shote Dawodu Consultants out of a contract worth N28.5 million"?
Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon, the Chief of Staff, who made the categorical statements, also said: "they have all confirmed receiving the money. I did not know how much they have got left in their account..
What does the Tribunal's verdict mean in the light of these earlier assertions by the second most powerful man in Nigeria? The suggestion is surely not being made that Brig. Idiagbon made deliberately false statements? Or the ex governors had been indulging in acts of self-flagellation: why did they admit to things they had not done? Why did Brig. Idiagbon say that the monies were infact in the accounts of the three men?
If the contract was awarded by the three men, how does one of them get convicted and the other two acquitted? No suggestion has been made from the scanty information from the Tribunal that the money was used by Chief Onabanjo personally, the beneficiary is said to have been the Unity Party of Nigeria, so how do the two other ex-governors escape from blame and the third man is found guilty and sentenced to 22 years imprisonment?
Far from having resolved the controversy that started with Brig. Idiagbon's sensational allegations against the three ex-governors, the verdict of the Lagos Special Military Tribunal has succeeded in raising more questions than it has answered.
In the meantime. Chief Bola Ige and Chief Ajasin are back in their prison cells, and are obviously going to be there until Chief of Staff Idiagbon holds another press conference and makes more allegations against them and they are hauled before the Tribunal again. The strategy seems to be, to keep them there until something is found that will stick. A fair trial Gen. Buhari has been promising all the past politicians, the first one to have been staged surely gives an indication of things to come.
Has Chief Onabanjo been found guilty because there had to be a 'face-saving ploy for Brig. Idiagbon's earlier categorical statements?
