Okorocha Challenges N2.9bn Fraud Claims, To Remain In EFCC Custody Till May 31
Ex-Governor of Imo State, Rochas Okorocha on Monday finally appeared before a Federal High Court in Abuja, where he pleaded not guilty to the N2.9 billion corruption charges brought against him by the Federal Government. Information Guide Nigeria
Okorocha was, on the 17-count charges, accused of diverting N2.9 billion from Imo State Government House accounts and that of Imo State Local Government Joint accounts to private companies. DAILY POST reports.
👉 Relocate to Canada Today!
Live, Study and Work in Canada. No Payment is Required! Hurry Now click here to Apply >> Immigrate to CanadaSee Other Top News:
- 2023 Election: You Can’t Be President – Primate Ayodele To Peter Obi
- UTME: JAMB Set To Screen 27,105 Results
- “I Am Now Officially A Professor” – Helen Paul Commends Achievement At A U.S Varsity
- EFCC Apprehends Former Gov. Yari Over Alleged Part In AGF’s N80bn Scam
The alleged fraud was said to have been perpetrated by Okorocha and one Anyim Inyerere with the use of their private companies between 2014 and 2016 when he held sway as the Executive Governor of Imo State.
Though he denied all the charges, Okorocha has however engaged the services of four Senior Advocates of Nigeria, SANs, comprising Okey Amaechi, Solomon Umor, Ola Olanipekun, and Kehinde Ogunwumiju to defend him from the grievous allegations against him.
Justice Inyang Ekwo who took his plea, however, ordered his further detention till May 31 when his bail application would be argued. jamb results
Shortly after taking the plea, EFCC counsel, Gbolahan Latona asked the judge for an adjournment to enable him to assemble his witnesses that will testify during the trial.
He informed the court that 15 witnesses have been arranged to testify against the All Progressives Congress, APC, presidential aspirant and that most of the witnesses are outside the court’s jurisdiction because of the peculiar nature of the charge.
Okorocha’s counsel, Okey Amaechi told the court that he had filed an application for the bail of his client and had also served the same on EFCC.
He attempted to argue the application but was opposed by the anti-graft agency which claimed that it intends to file a counter-affidavit against the bail issued.
