Follow Us on Google
By Lukman Olabiyi
The Lagos State Special Offences Court, Ikeja, has discharged social media celebrity Ismaila Mustapha, popularly known as Mompha, and struck out the alleged ₦6 billion money laundering charge brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Justice Mojisola Dada, in her ruling on Tuesday, held that the pendency of a similar case involving the defendant before the Federal High Court in Lagos made the prosecution at the Ikeja court an act of forum shopping and an abuse of court process.
Consequently, the judge struck out all eight counts preferred against Mompha and his company, Ismalob Global Investment Limited, and discharged the defendants.
The EFCC had, on 12 January 2022, arraigned Mompha and his company on an eight-count charge bordering on conspiracy to launder proceeds of unlawful activities, retention and laundering of proceeds of criminal conduct, failure to disclose assets and property, possession of documents containing false pretences, and use of property derived from unlawful acts.
Mompha, who pleaded not guilty to the charges, was subsequently tried in absentia after he reportedly stopped attending court proceedings following the grant of bail.
The anti-graft agency had alleged that Mompha, alongside one Ahmadu Mohammed, who is still at large, and his company, sometime in 2016, conspired to conduct financial transactions worth about ₦6 billion with the intention of promoting unlawful activities, including obtaining money by false pretences.
Other News
During the trial, EFCC counsel, Mr Seleiman Suleiman, called six prosecution witnesses and tendered several documentary exhibits in support of the allegations.
The defence, however, did not call any witness.
The court had, on 28 April, closed the defence’s case after Mompha’s counsel, Mr Kolawole Salami, of the chambers of Mr Gboyega Oyewole, SAN, failed to produce witnesses.
The defendant had reportedly stopped appearing in court after being granted bail, with his international passport deposited as part of the bail conditions.
However, in its ruling on Tuesday, the court held that proceeding with the charge before it, while a similar case was pending before the Federal High Court, amounted to an abuse of judicial process.
