Justice Akintunde Boade of the Oyo State High Court, on Thursday, fixed October 9 to deliver ruling on the application to quash the corruption charges brought by the EFCC against Otunba Alao Akala, the former Oyo State governor.
Akala was charged alongside Senator Hosea Agboola, the former Commissioner for Local government and Chieftaincy ?Affairs during his administration.
The third accused person, Femi Babalola, was said to be the ?contractor in charge of all local government-related projects ?during the Akala administration.
The three defendants were arraigned on an 11-count charge of conspiracy, illegal award of contracts, obtaining by false pretence, acquiring property with money derived from illegal acts, and concealing the ownership of such property.
The defence counsel, Lateef Fagbemi, had filed an application urging the court to quash the charges against his clients.
He told the court that the proof of evidence and the preliminary objection submitted by the prosecutor were irregularly placed and therefore not in cognisance in law.
Fagbemi stated that there was no case against his clients, since the proof of evidence submitted by the prosecution lacked the essential requirements.
He added that since it would be impossible for the court to request for further evidence once hearing had started, the court should, at this early stage, save its time and strike out the charges.
The defence counsel frowned at courts holding trials to satisfy public sentiments, especially when the prosecution could not ?really establish the charges.
?A trial is not to satisfy public sentiments and the court does not ration justice, rather, it dispenses it,? Fagbemi said.
But the prosecuting counsel, Godwin Obla, ?said the court had the right to go on with the trial since all the accused persons had earlier taken their pleas on the matter before the court.
He interpreted the implication of the taking of pleas to mean that they had unequivocally submitted to the jurisdiction of the court.
Obla further told the court that all their filed processes, especially the proof of evidence, could be relied upon since they were linked with the accused persons.
?We have provided enough grounds for the court to ask the accused persons to answer some questions and the court should not be stampeded at this stage to throw out this case,” he said.
?They cannot say they have no case. Let them come and at least give a little explanation about what they know about the charges against them.?
He added that the defence should desist from causing technical delays to stop trials that have merits.
?People should take trials on their merits and clear their good names,? Obla said.
He, thereafter, submitted that the court should uphold the prosecution?s preliminary objection and ask the defence counsel to open his case.
