Follow Us on Google
From Tony john, Port Harcourt
A High Court, sitting in Port Harcourt, will today commence hearing on an alleged $130 million fraud between Rivers State Government and Saipem Nigeria Contracting Limited.
Parties involved in the matter in Suit No: PHC/3106/CR/2021, included Rivers State Government (prosecution) and Saipem SPA (first defendant), Saipem Contracting Nigeria Limited (second defendant), Walter Peviana (third defendant), Kelechi Sinteh Chinakwe (fourth defendant), Giandomenico Zingali (fifth defendant), Vitto Testaguzza (sixth defendant) and Davide Anelli (seventh defendant).
Rivers government had sued the defendants over an alleged conspiracy to cheat and with the intent to defraud the Rivers State government of $130 million, being advanced payment for the construction of OCGT power plant in Port Harcourt.
After the last adjournment, on January 18, court fixed yesterday, today and tomorrow for hearing on substantive matter. At the hearing, first, second, third and sixth defendants counsel, Odein Ajumogobia, drew the attention of the court to the fact that he had preliminary objection to the continuation of the trial.
He told the court that an objection was filed on January 31, and served on Tuesday, February 1.
Earlier, the state (prosecution) counsel, Godwin Obla argued that the first and second defendants (Saipem SPA and Saipem Nigeria Contracting Limited respectively), were not represented by anybody in any capacity.
Prosecution wanted the court to have it on record that, not having been represented by their authorised representatives, but being represented by counsel, puts them (first and second defendants) in category of persons that should be tried in absentia, stressing that it is the position of the law.
Others to be tried in absentia alongside first and second defendants include the fifth, sixth and seventh defendants.
Obla told the court that the practice rules state that the prosecution has about seven days to respond.
He said there was no order of court abridging that time; but, the first and second defendants’ counsel insisted on court proceeding with the hearing.
However, the defendants’ counsel, Ajumogobia, argued about the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the case.
Justice Okogbule Gbasam had earlier admitted the submission of the state counsel and ruled that the first and second defendants would be tried in absentia.
Obla, who spoke to newsmen outside the courtroom, said: “In the interest of justice, even the rules permit the judge to have proceeded. But, in the face of the objection attacking the jurisdiction of the court, the judge decided to abridge time to hear the applications, by giving less than 24 hours to respond and for the defence to reply on point of law orally.
