A Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama, Abuja, has deferred its ruling on an application seeking to discontinue the ongoing trial of former Aviation Minister, Hadi Sirika, until the day judgment will be delivered in the case.
Justice S.C. Oriji made the decision on Tuesday, June 2, 2026, during proceedings in the alleged N2.8 billion contract fraud case instituted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The EFCC is prosecuting Sirika alongside his daughter, Fatima Hadi Sirika, and his son-in-law, Hamma Jalal Sule, on an amended six-count charge. The anti-graft agency alleges that contracts worth N2,825,032,220.97 were awarded to Al Buraq Global Investment Limited, a company allegedly linked to Sirika’s daughter.
During Tuesday’s hearing, counsel to the third defendant, Sanusi Musa (SAN), urged the court to stop the prosecution from presenting further evidence. He also requested that all exhibits and evidence already tendered be struck out and the charges dismissed, arguing that the case was initiated on the basis of an incomplete investigation.
However, prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), opposed the application, citing Section 379(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015. He argued that the law permits the filing of additional evidence and exhibits at any stage before judgment and noted that appellate courts have upheld such practices in several decisions.
Read also:
- Court arraigns 33 suspects in connection of Okporojo massacre
- NJC suspends two Judges, recommends 12 new Appeal Court Justices
- Court blocks inauguration of elected INC officials, restrains CITRE
In his ruling, Justice Oriji referenced Section 396(2) of the ACJA, which allows defendants to challenge the validity of charges before judgment but permits the court to determine such objections alongside the substantive case.
The judge held that although the motion did not directly challenge the validity of the charge, the issues raised were closely connected to the determination of the case itself.
“This motion is not challenging the validity of the charge. However, the issues and prayers in this application are inextricably tied or connected to the determination of the charge. Therefore, in my view, judicial prudence dictates that it is better to deliver the ruling on the motion along with the judgment on the charge after the trial and I so direct,” Justice Oriji said.
The court subsequently adjourned the matter to June 10, 2026, for continuation of trial proceedings.
