Almost twelve years after, final judgement was pronounced on former member of the House of Representatives, Hon. Farouk Lawan as the Supreme Court on Friday dismissed his appeal against the judgments of the lower courts which imprisoned him. He was sentenced to five years in prison for receiving $500,000 bribe from Mr. Femi Otedola.

Upholding the former lawmaker’s conviction, a five-member panel of the court in its unanimous judgement, dismissed his appeal challenging the decision of the Court of Appeal which had also affirmed his conviction by the trial court.

In the lead judgement prepared by Justice John Okoro but read by Justice Tijjani Abubakar ,the Supreme Court held that Hon. Lawan’s appeal lacked merit. Justice Abubakar upheld the decision of the Appeal Court and dismissed the appeal.

Justice Angela Otaluka, held that Hon. Lawan demanded $3m and received $500,000 from Mr. Femi Otedola in 2012 to remove Mr. Otedola’s oil company, Zenon Oil and Gas, from the list of firms indicted for fraud in the fuel subsidy regime.

She also held that Lawan was guilty of all three counts of corruption and bribery.

Justice Otaluka of the Federal Capital Territory High Court sentenced Hon. Lawan to seven years imprisonment for receiving a $500,000 bribe while serving as the chairman of the House’s ad-hoc committee investigating the fuel subsidy fraud in 2012.

Dissatisfied with the court’s judgement, Hon. Lawan approached the appellate court where his jail term was reduced from seven to five years.

Dismissing the first two counts, a three-member bench of the Court of Appeal led by the court’s president, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, unanimously ruled that the prosecution failed to prove that Hon. Lawan demanded and agreed to accept a $3 million bribe from Mr Otedola to exonerate the businessman’s company from the list of firms indicted for fuel subsidy fraud in 2012.

The decision capitalised on a major investigative flaw in the case, with the court holding that the prosecution failed to establish whether it was Mr Otedola who offered the bribe or it was Hon. Lawan who asked for it.

David Igbodo, the police investigative officer, who testified as the second prosecution witness (PW2), “was evasive” at the trial court on the issue of the telephone conversations the two men had on the bribery, Mrs Dongban-Mensem said in her lead judgement.

She said the prosecution could have obtained the call logs of both men to determine who initiated the bribery conversation, but they failed to so do.

“The respondent did not find it necessary to contact the service providers to establish that the appellant demanded $ 3 million from PW5 (Mr Otedola),” she said.

She added that Mr Otedola’s claim that Mr Lawan asked for the bribe was not corroborated by any evidence.

“There is no scintilla of evidence from PW2 (Mr Igbodo) establishing or proving that the appellant (Mr Lawan) corruptly asked for $3 million from PW5 (Mr Otedola). There is also no evidence that the appellant agreed to accept $ 3 million from PW5 to remove Zenon Oil and Gas Limited and AP Petroleum from the list of indicted firms,” the judge held.

Dismissing the two charges, she held: “There is a very big lacuna in Counts 1 and 2”.

“There is no compelling evidence against the appellant in Counts 1 and 2,” she added.

But the panel affirmed the decision of the lower court that Mr Lawan, indeed, accepted a $500,000 bribe from Mr Otedola, an offence that attracted five years’ imprisonment at the lower court.

Justice Dongban-Mensem held that Hon. Lawan’s claim that he collected the $500,000 as evidence of bribery against Mr Otedola did not hold water.

The judge pointed out from the trial court’s records that Hon. Lawan admitted that he did not report the money he received from Mr Otedola to any law enforcement agency.

“It is curious that he accepted the $500,000 as evidence of bribe but failed to report it to any law enforcement agency,” she held.

She also referred to the testimony of one of Hon. WLawan’s contemporaries at the House of Representatives, Adams Jagaba, who testified as the fourth prosecution witness (PW4) to the detriment of the convict’s line of defence.

Mr Jagaba said it was untrue that Mr Lawan submitted the money to him as an exhibit with a cover letter.

“No such money or memo was given to PW4,” the court held.

Affirming Mr Lawan’s conviction and sentence of five years imprisonment on the charge of taking a $500,000 bribe from Mr Otedola, the court held that the prosecution proved it “beyond reasonable doubt”.

The Court of Appeal affirmed both the conviction and the sentence passed by the lower court on the offence. But it discharged and acquitted him regarding the two other counts of demanding and agreeing to accept $3 million from Mr Otedola to clear his company.