Justice Rilwan Aikawa of a Federal High Court, Lagos, at the weekend dismissed a contempt application filed by a former Minister of State for Finance, Mrs. Esther Nenadi Usman, seeking to commit the Minister of Information, Alhaji Lai Mohammed to prison for the inclusion of her name in the ‘looters’ list’ he released to the public.
Justice Aikawa described the application as a distraction which could interfere with the speedy determination of the matter.
Mrs. Usman, who is facing allegations of money laundering brought against her and a former Minister of Aviation, Femi Fani-Kayode, had argued in the contempt application that the inclusion of her name on list released by the information minister during the pendecy of the case against her is contemptuous.
She therefore urged the court to commit the Information Minister to prison for contempt of court over his alleged contemptuous action.
The former Minister had also argued that Mohammed’s action undermines the integrity of the court and is aimed at poisoning the mind of the public against her.
But the EFCC lawyer, Rotimi Oyedepo, urged the court to decline the Usman’s application, insisted that the applicant was never referred to as a looter by the information minister saying what was published by some newspapers only bordered on allegations and cannot be said to be prejudicial to the applicant’s case in court.
He said: “The minister of information is not a party to the criminal proceedings against the applicant. There is no evidence to show that the alleged contemnor works with the various media houses that published the alleged offensive publication. Besides, there were no allegations against the media houses that published the alleged offensive publication.
“There was nothing that connects the ministry of information to the motion which was taken out to annoy the prosecution. The motion is lacking in substance, it is an abuse of court’s process and should be dismissed,” Oyedepo maintained.
In his ruling, Justice Aikawa agreed with the prosecution that the right parties to the contempt proceedings were not before the court.
According to him, the publications which the applicant complained of was published by media houses and not the alleged contemnor, so the right parties to be joined in this application are the media houses.
The judge also held that a mere publication which did not go to the substance of the case or directly affect the proceedings before the court can not be said to have interfered or influenced the mind of the court.
He further stated that the publication is not an advertorial from the Minister of Information, so he can not be held responsible for what was published by the media houses.
The judge therefore hold that the publication is not prejudicial to the applicant’s case in court and it is thereby dismissed for lacking in merit.