The Civil Society Groups for the Defence of Human Rights, Justice and Equity has beckoned on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to investigate Alhaji Sani Dauda popularly known as ASD, together with Senator Shehu Sani for attempting to bribe Ibrahim Magu, the EFCC Acting Chairman.
The group posited that both individuals ought to be investigated following the affirmation by ASD on his part in the act. The CSO also frowned at the commission for arresting and detaining only Sani while ASD walks freely.
Recall that the Economic
and Financial Crimes Commission had arrested Sani for allegedly obtaining
Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) from ASD to bribe Magu in order to
protect him from an investigation by the agency.
The Agency has also explored Sani’s mobile phones and invaded his residence in search of incriminating evidence to be used against him.
Zidec Exclusive had solely reported that the commission arrested the former senator before seeking out his accuser to prove his innocence.
Condemning the unfairness of the agency, Adamu Matazu, the spokesperson for the rights group, while addressing journalists on Sunday 12th January, 2020, he advised the EFCC to investigate ASD for willingly attempting to compromise an ongoing investigation and pending judicial cases.
According to Matazu, “As civil society groups, we will not fold our arms and watch the desecration of the temple of justice by some deceitful elements with connection in higher places, and ought to be aware that the whole world is watching on how they will finally deliver justice objectively or undermine the course of justice in the case of Abubakar Musa Abubakar vs Nasiba Sani Dauda and others, most especially that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s report in the public domain and as published by various newspapers to the effect that N1m each was given to four judges in order to compromise any case before them where Abubakar Musa Abubakar is a party.
We expect nothing less than the impartial dispensation of justice without unnecessary interference or pressure and incentive by making sure that only verified facts are admitted as evidence as we shall scrutinize the proceedings from the commencement to a coherent ending.