By Ismail Yahya.
A Bauchi State High Court says the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission EFCC has the constitutional rights to investigate the former chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party in Bauchi State, Hamza Koshe Akuyam, and his company, Pentech Engineering Nigeria Limited.
The ruling was delivered by Justice Aliyu Baba, who dismissed an application filed by Koshe seeking to stop both the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission ICPC from probing him.
Koshe had approached the court last year, asking for a perpetual injunction to bar the anti-graft agencies from investigating a contract financing agreement between his company and the Bauchi State Ministry of Finance.
But in his judgment, Justice Baba ruled that no court has the power to prevent law enforcement agencies from carrying out their constitutional duties of investigating and prosecuting economic and financial crimes.
The EFCC also disclosed that Hamza Koshe had earlier been invited for questioning but chose instead to drag the commission to court.
Meanwhile, the legal team representing Pentech Engineering Nigeria Limited and Alhaji Hamza Koshe Akuyam JIS-JIM and Co., in a statement faulted the publication by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, stating that the commission’s report on the recent High Court judgment in Bauchi was false and misleading.
They explained that Justice Aliyu Baba Usman of High Court Number Four, Bauchi, had on the 30th of July delivered judgment in favour of their clients.
The firm further pointed out that in an earlier ruling, Justice M.M. Abubakar of High Court Number Ten had already declared the contract financing agreement in question as valid and enforceable, granting Pentech Engineering necessary reliefs against the EFCC.
The lawyers say the aim of their clarification is to set the record straight, insisting that the judgment of the court stands in favour of their clients.
They added that the statement by the EFCC alleging that their clients went to the court to seek for a perpetual injunction against the commission’s activities is not true.
