Recall that Otabor and three other staff members of the hospital are facing trial for allegedly removing kidneys of two teenagers without the consent of their parents.
The Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, High Court has set aside the objection of defence filed before it by the defence team of the Managing Director of the Abuja-based Alliance Hospital and Services Ltd, Dr Christopher Otabor, and three other staff members of the hospital on the alleged organ harvesting case.
Recall that Otabor and three other staff members of the hospital are facing trial for allegedly removing kidneys of two teenagers without the consent of their parents.
The National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons, (NAPTIP) arraigned the staff members on 11 counts bordering on alleged involvement in organ harvesting.
Other staff members of the hospital arraigned with Otabor include Emmanuel Muyiwa Olorunlaye, Chikaodili Ugochukwu and Dr Aremu Abayomi.
They were all charged for contravening Section 20 (3), of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition), Enforcement and Administration Act, 2015.
The suspects were accused of playing a part in the harvesting of the kidneys of three young males including two minors between February and May 2023.
The fathers of the victims, Salaudeen Sulaimon Adedoyin and Musa Yahaya, told the FCT High Court in Zuba earlier this month that they did not give consent to the operation.
The defence team had filed an objection of defence to the tendering of the statement of the 1st defendant, Emmanuel Muyiwa Olorunlaye by the PW8, the NAPTIP Investigating Officer, as an exhibit in the case.
Olorunlaye was alleged to be the major recruiter of victims for organ harvesting for the hospital.
But following the testimony of one of the Prosecution Witnesses (PW8), Mr. Liman Yusuf Shehu and another witness, Mr Lanre Akande, whose account was alleged to have been used to send money to organ harvesting victims, the court onTuesday overruled the defence team’s application.
Otabor owns the famous Alliance Hospital, located in the highbrow Garki area of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, which has been enmeshed in the alleged organ harvest controversy since the past year involving some persons.
According to a statement issued by NAPTIP’s Communication Officer, Adekoye Vincent, first to testify on Tuesday was an Abuja–based businessman, Lanre Akande, who told the Court how the 1st defendant, Olorunlaye, who is alleged to be the recruiter of the victims, requested for his account to be used to send money to someone which he obliged and a sum of N500,000 was sent through his account to the person.
Akande told the Court that a few months later, while trying to make a transaction in the same account, he was told that the account had been frozen following a letter from NAPTIP.
“This was followed by his arrest and interrogation by the Agency.”
Thereafter, the Lead Prosecution Counsel and Director, Legal and Prosecution Department, NAPTIP, Mr. Hassan Hamis Tahir, invited the PW8, Mr. Liman Yusuf Shehu, to testify.
The witness, who is a Principal Intelligence Officer with the Agency, told the Court how the case was reported by the parents of the Victims, how he took their statement following the laid down legal procedures, and invited the Victims, after which he extended his investigation to all concerned in the case.
Liman explained how the victims were recruited, screened in the Alliance Hospital, and their Kidney removed depicting a syndicate activity.
From the statements of the victims, their parents, and the witnesses, Limwn explained to the Court the roles of each of the defendants ranging from the recruitment, screening of the victims, obtaining of consent, actual removal of the kidney by the surgeon, payment for the kidney and the discharge of the victim.
The Prosecution team led by Tahir, sought to tender the statement of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants, as Exhibits.
While there was no objection to the statement of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th defendant by the defence counsel, there was a vehement objection to the tendering of the statement of the 1st Defendant, by the defence counsel, Richard Adepoju and Mazi AfamOsigwe (SAN).
While the Counsel to the 1st defendant, Adepoju, objected to the tendering of the statement citing section 29 of the Evidence Act which bothered on inducement and involuntariness of confessional statements, counsel to the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendant, Mazi Afam Osigwe (SAN), argued that the statement did not meet the requirements of section 15(4) and section 17 (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 to the effect that a statement written, recorded electrically and must be taken in the presence of a Legal Practitioner, Legal Aid Counsel or Justice of Peace.
But the prosecution team in their submission hinged their argument on the provision of the Evidence Act which emphasizes relevance as the basis for admissibility of evidence adding the word “May” in the above provision is not mandatory but rather discretionary.
In her ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Keziah Ogbonnaya, held that the defence counsel’s submission of alleged inducement and involuntary was not substantiated.
The judge added that the fact that the statement was written by the Investigation Officer based on the fact that the 1st defendant had an injury on one of his finders under caution, read to him twice after which he countersigned, shows that it was voluntary.
On the submission by 1st Defendant’s counsel, Justice Ogbonnaya said the word “May” in the provision of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 is discretional and not mandatory.
The judge explained that the “Trinity of Justice” upon which a statement could be admitted which includes voluntariness and relevant to the case at hand, must meet the requirement of the law.
The judge therefore overruled the objection of the defence counsel and admitted the statement as an exhibit.
The court adjourned the case to July 2, for hearing of the no-case submission which was advanced by the defence counsel at the close of the prosecution’s case.