CORAM

---

ONU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

KALGO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MUKHTAR JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OGBUAGU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

APPELLANTS 

---

 SENATOR OLAWOLE JULIUS ADEWUNMI

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was charged before the Failed Banks (Recovery of Debts) and Financial Malpractices in Banks Tribunal in March 1997 on (918) counts. The charge sheet was signed and filed by a Senior State Counsel with the rank of Assistant Chief Legal Officer and a private legal practitioner on behalf of the Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation.

 

 

---

HELD

---

The Supreme Court held that the signing of the charge by both the State counsel and a private Legal practitioner did not vitiate the charge.

 

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Was it not wrong of the Court of Appeal to hold that the amendment of the charge against the respondent after the commencement of the 1999 Constitution makes the amended charge a new one and the initiation of which was invalidated by the provisions of that Constitution; notwithstanding that the charge was unquestionably valid at the time of its filing in 1997.

2. If Section 174 of the 1999 Constitution forbids the Attorney-General of the Federation from instructing a private Legal practitioner to initiate criminal prosecution (s) as decided by the Court of Appeal, but not conceded by the Appellant, has the signature of a state counsel on the amended charge not foreclosed any question about its validity regardless of whether or not it was countersigned by a private legal practitioner authorized by the Attorney-General to do so?

 

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

PRESUMPTION OF AUTHORITY OF COUNSEL REPRESENTING HIS CLIENT

---

“Once a Counsel appears in a case and announces his appearance, the court assumes, that he has the authority of his client for the conduct of the case. Once he is instructed and he announces his appearance in court, and he is so instructed, it raises a presumption of his authority and he assumes full control of the conduct of his client’s case.”Per I. F. OGBUAGU, JSC

 

POWER TO INSTITUTE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS-WHETHER DELEGABLE

“There is no doubt at all that the power to institute criminal proceedings against any person in the 1999 constitution lies on the Attorney-General of the State or the Federation as the case may be, but such power may be exercised by the Attorney-General himself or through any officers of the department see section 174 and 211 of the 1999 constitution. These sections though very similar in content do not require that the officers can only exercise the power to institute criminal proceedings if the Attorney-General expressly donated his power to them. The provisions of the sections presume that any officer in any department of the Attorney-General’s office is empowered to initiate criminal proceedings unless it is proved otherwise.” Per Kalgo, JSC

 

 

---

CASES CITED

---

1. Col. Rotimi v. Macgregor (1974)11 S.C. 133

2. Adio v. The State (1986) 4 S.C. 194 at 212-213

 

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

1. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

2. The Law Officers Act

 

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT