Nearly six years after he was accused of stealing N20 million belonging to the Akwa Ibom State judiciary, an accountant with the state judiciary, Iniobong Essien, has been discharged and acquitted by a State High Court in Uyo.
Delivering judgement on 18 February, Justice Bassey Nkanang ruled that the prosecution failed to establish that Mr Essien fraudulently took the money, according to a report published by Crystal Express, a newspaper in Akwa Ibom.
The judge ruled that suspicion and administrative negligence cannot serve as substitutes for proof of criminal intent.
Mr Essien, an accountant II with the state judiciary, had faced a two-count charge of conspiracy and stealing in connection with the theft of N20 million withdrawn from Zenith Bank in February 2020.
The case, filed on 18 August 2020 and marked HU/182C/2020, alleged that Mr Essien and others, who are still at large, conspired on 14 February 2020 to steal funds belonging to the Akwa Ibom State Judiciary.
Prosecution’s case
During the trial, the prosecution, led by state counsel Akaninyene Akpan, argued that the circumstances surrounding the withdrawal and movement of the money pointed to criminal intent to steal.
The first prosecution witness, Udofot Etukudo, then chief accountant of the judiciary, told the court that two cheques were issued on 13 February 2020 for the withdrawal of N20 million for official expenses.
Mr Etukudo said Mr Essien obtained approval to request N50,000 to hire a bullion van and police escort to transport the cash safely, but failed to go to the bank that day despite holding the cheques.
According to the prosecution, he instead went to the bank alone the following day and transported the money in his private Toyota Camry, a move they argued violated treasury guidelines on the conveyance of large cash.
Another witness, Godwin Akpan, who served as the chief security officer of the judiciary at the time, told the court that when Mr Essien returned to the judiciary headquarters, the cash kept in the car’s boot had disappeared.
He testified that there were no signs of forced entry into the car, prompting suspicion that the theft may have been staged.
Defendant’s counter-argument
Mr Essien, defended by his lawyer, Dominic Okon, denied any involvement in the theft of the money. He insisted that he was a victim of circumstances.
Testifying in his defence, he told the court that the approved funds meant for hiring a bullion van were never released to him, forcing him to use his personal car to transport the cash.
Two other defence witnesses, both judicial staff members, introduced a crucial twist to the prosecution’s narrative.
Ime Inim, a clerical officer, testified that she saw unidentified men carrying bags from the boot of Mr Essien’s car on the day of the incident and assumed they were authorised to offload them.
Another witness from the internal audit unit, Udeme Obong, corroborated the account, saying he also saw unknown persons removing bags from the vehicle before any alarm about missing money was raised.
The prosecution did not discredit the witnesses nor present evidence to contradict their testimony.
Court judgement
In his judgement, Justice Nkanang said the central question before the court was whether the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr Essien fraudulently took the N20 million.
He noted that criminal offences could be proved through eyewitness testimony, confessional statements, or circumstantial evidence.
The judge said the prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence and failed to establish a chain of facts strong enough to link the defendant directly to the theft.
ALSO READ: JUSUN chapters withdraw from planned federal judiciary workers strike
He held that the testimony of the defence witnesses, who said unknown persons were seen removing bags from the vehicle, created reasonable doubt about who actually took the money.
“There is no evidence whatsoever, direct or circumstantial, from which the court could infer that the defendant planted those men,” the judge said.
The court ruled that the possibility that other persons not connected to the defendant stole the money could not be ruled out.
Justice Nkanang further held that since the prosecution failed to prove the substantive offence of stealing, the allegation of conspiracy could not stand without independent evidence of an agreement to commit the crime.
He discharged and acquitted Mr Essien on both counts.
Negligence noted
Despite the acquittal, the judge criticised Mr Essien’s conduct in handling the funds.
He said the defendant acted recklessly by delaying the bank visit, using his private car to transport such a large sum and leaving the money unattended in the vehicle.
Such actions, Justice Nkanang said, could attract administrative or disciplinary sanctions but did not amount to criminal stealing.