UPDATED: Convicted Sen. Orji Kalu Begs Court To Grant Him Bail Pending Appeal.

* Says He Needs To See Herbalist

Convicted former Governor of Abia State, Sen. Orji Kalu on Tuesday, asked a Federal High Court Lagos, to grant him bail from the Ikoyi Correctional Service. pending the determination of an Appeal against his sentence.

Trial judge, Justice Mohammed Idris, had convicted and sentenced Orji Uzor Kalu to a concurrent term of 12 years imprisonment over N7.2billion fraud.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charged and prosecuted Kalu together with his former Commissioner for Finance, Jonnes Ude Udeogo, and a Company, Slok Nigeria Ltd, on an amended 39 counts charge of fraud.

The trial which started in 2007, experienced series of setbacks but eventually ended in October 2019 when parties adopted written submissions, and the convicts were sentenced on Dec. 5.

In his judgement, Justice Idris had found Kalu and his Company Slok Nigeria Ltd, guilty of all 39 counts of the charge, while the second defendant Udeogo, was convicted on 34 counts of the charge.

Kalu was sentenced to a term of 12 years imprisonment for the offence, Udeogo was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, while the court had ordered that Slok Nigeria Ltd be wound up and it’s assets forfeited to Federal Government.

On Tuesday , Mr RotimI Jacobs (SAN) announced appearance for prosecution, while Messrs Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) and Awa Kalu (SAN) appeared for Kalu.

Meanwhile, Messrs L.U Agu and David Idang held briefs on behalf of second and third defence counsel.

Fagbemi then informed the court of a bail application filed on behalf of the first convict, seeking to be released on bail pending Appeal.

He told the court that his application was premised on 23 grounds and supported by an affidavit of 38 paragraphs, adding that after receiving the counter affidavit of prosecution. He had filed a 34 paragraph further affidavit with one exhibit attached.

Fagbemi also drew the court’s attention to a Notice of Appeal against the conviction of Kalu, and relied on the provisions of sections 241 of the Constitution in urging the court to grant the applicant bail pending Appeal.

“If there is a right of appeal, then there is a corresponding right of bail pending appeal, ” he said.

Citing the case of Okitipupa as well as sections 6 of the Constitution, Fagbemi argued that being a court of record, it has the powers to entertain such applications since post-judgment jurisdiction are anchored on section 6 of the Constitution.

In arguing the application for bail, he mainly relied on the Ill health of the first convict, as well as the need for him to return to the floor of the National Assembly to carry out his service to the nation.

He, therefore, urged the court to grant the application as sought.

Meanwhile, in arguing his counter-affidavit in opposition to the bail application, the prosector, (Jacobs ) said:

“Although bail is generally a right of an accused as guranteed by the constitution, it is not a right available to a convict because the presumption of innocence has crystslised into guilt and conviction,” he said

Jacobs argued that such application for bail pending appeal is “sparingly” granted by the court for instance, in situations where the terms of imprisonment would have lasped before the appeal is determined.

He argued that this was not the situation with the case of Kalu.

On the health condition of Kalu, Jacobs argued that there was no recent medical report to show his state of health as the medical report attached was over a year ago.

Besides, Jacobs argued that the request by Kalu to be released on bail so as to seek ‘traditional medicine” was not a tenable ground as visitors were allowed into the prison.

“He says he needs his traditional herbalist to treat him but he has not said that his herbalist came to the prison and was not allowed to see him.

“In one breath, applicant is saying that he wants to be released on health grounds while in another breath he is saying that as senator, he needs to be released on bail so as to carryout his official functions,” he said

Citing the case of FRN vs Joshua Dariye, prosecution argued that the Nigerian criminal jurisprudence is robust enough to handle Appeal and dispense with same within reasonable time.

Besides, he argued that the medical facilities at the correctional centre is capable of handling the medical condition of the convict.

He, therefore, urged the court to refuse the bail application of Kalu.

Justice Mohammed Liman has adjourned the case until Dec. 23 for the ruling.