SLOK Asks Appeal Court To Set Aside Judgment Ordering Its Winding Up

SLOK Nigeria Limited has approached the Lagos division of the
Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court
ordering its winding up and forfeiture of its assets to the Federal
Government.

The company, dissatisfied with the judgment of the Lagos
division of the Federal High Court delivered by Justice MB Idris,
in charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/56/2007-FRN V. Orji Kalu and 2 others,
filed a notice of appeal pursuant to order 7 rule 2 in urging the
appellate court to set aside the decision of the trial court and to
pronounce it discharged and acquitted.

In the notice of appeal, which is predicated on 30 grounds, the
appellant is challenging the entire decision of the lower court,
positing that the trial judge erred in law and occasioned a
miscarriage of justice in arriving at his conclusion.

Specifically, the appellant through its counsel, KC Nwufo, SAN,
contended that the judgment of the trial court finding the
appellant guilty on counts 12 to 39 of the charge, and ordering its
winding up and forfeiture of its assets to the Federal Government
is unreasonable, unwarranted and cannot be supported, having regard
to the evidence adduced before the court.

It further contended that the trial judge erred in law when he
assumed jurisdiction to entertain the charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/56/2007
as a high court judge after his elevation and swearing-in as a
justice of the Court of Appeal, and that this occasioned a gross
miscarriage of justice.

It is the contention of the appellant that there was no evidence
before the court that the bank paid any money from Government
House, Umuahia account into the appellant’s account, adding that
PW19 on May 11, 2018 specifically stated under cross-examination
that the staff of the Inland Bank did not lodge any money into the
appellant’s account.

In addition, the company averred that its statement of account
did not show that any funds from the state Government House,
Umuahia was paid into its account.

The appellant further argued that the trial judge erred in law
when he held thus: “In this case, the prosecution has tendered the
statement of account which shows that money was lodged into the 3rd
defendant’s account by Inland Bank. Besides, the question the 3rd
defendant and the 1st defendant should be answering is not about
the slips that show lodgment but the source of the money that
Inland Bank was paying into its account.”

The appellant further contended that the trial judge erred in
law when he held thus: “From the totality of evidence led by the
prosecution and by considering the ingredients of the offences
above, it is clear that the 1st defendant did procure the 3rd
defendant to retain the proceed of crime and the 3rd defendant must
have known or suspected that the money was gotten from criminal
conducts, the 1st and 3rd defendants are therefore guilty of counts
1 and 12 respectively.”

On the above findings, the appellant argued that there is no
evidence that the 1st defendant did procure the appellant to retain
any proceeds of crime, as there is also no evidence that the
appellant must have known or suspected that any money in her
account was gotten from any alleged criminal conduct.

SLOK Nigeria further argued that there is no evidence placed
before the court that the defendants, including the appellant,
collaborated to conceal the origin of funds which were allegedly
illegally withdrawn from the account of the Government House,
Umuahia with UBA Plc.

It submitted that the appellant is not guilty of allegedly
collaborating in concealing the genuine origin of the sum of
N200,000,000.00, said to have been illegally withdrawn from the
account of the Government House, Umuahia with UBA Plc.