An FCT High Court Maitama, on Tuesday fixed October 16 for ruling on the
admissibility of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, documents in
the trial of Babachair Lawal, former Secretary to the Government of the
Justice Jude Okeke fixed the date after all counsel in the matter argued
for and against the admissibility of EFCC’s documents.
He also fixed October 17 for continuation of the prosecution’s case.
The former SGF and his brother, Hamidu David Lawal, a director of
Rholavision Engineering Limited; an employee of the company, Sulaiman
Abubakar and the Managing Director of Josmon Technologies Limited, Apeh John Monday were charged by EFCC.
They are charged with 10 counts of conspiracy and fraud brought before
the court by the anti-corruption commission.
They and two companies, Rholavision Engineering Limited and Josmon
Technologies Limited are being prosecuted by the EFCC.
EFCCC accused Babachir Lawal of illegally benefiting from the approval of
N544,119,925.36 for the removal of invasive plant species and simplified
The EFCC alleged that Lawal being the SGF and Hamidu Lawal,
director of Rholavision Engineering Limited and Abubakar, staff about
March 7, 2016 at Abuja conspired to commit the offences.
It alleged that the defendants fraudulently acquired a property,
contrary to Section 26 (1) (c) of the Corrupt Practices and Other
Related Offences Act, 2000.
It also alleged that the former SGF knowingly held indirectly a private
interest in the consultancy contract awarded to Rholavision Engineering
Limited for the removal of invasive plant species and simplified
irrigation to the tune of N7 million and N6.4 million.
EFCC claimed that it was done through the Presidential Initiative for
It further alleged that on March 4 and August 22, 2016 contract for
removing evasive grass worth N272.5 million and N258.1 million
respectively were awarded to Josmon Technologies Limited but was
executed by Rholavision.
The offences, according to EFCC, were contrary to Section 12 of the
Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.
The six defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred