Whether Incorrect Statement in a Judgement is Sufficient to Upturn the Decision

The Supreme Court of Nigeria is considering an appeal against a money laundering conviction that was based on criminal breach of trust. The appellant, Capt. Ezekiel Bala Agaba, was initially convicted by the Federal High Court in Lagos and sentenced to seven years imprisonment. His subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed, leading to the current appeal before the nation's highest court.

A central argument from the appellant is that the conviction is constitutionally flawed. He contends that criminal breach of trust, cited as the predicate offense for money laundering, does not have the force of law in Lagos State, where the alleged crime took place. This, he argues, violates his constitutional rights under Sections 36(8) and (12) of the 1999 Constitution, which pertain to the legality of offenses and punishments.

The appeal also questions the lower court's application of the Ejusdem Generis Rule in interpreting Section 15(6) of the Money Laundering Act, 2011. The appellant argues this interpretation infringes upon the powers of individual states to legislate on offenses within their territories, as outlined in Section 4 of the Constitution.

Furthermore, the appellant challenges the appellate court's evaluation of documentary evidence presented in his defense against the money laundering allegations. He questions whether the court properly exercised its power to assess this evidence. The appeal also raises the issue of whether the affirmation of his conviction for conversion and money laundering was made per incuriam, given that he was not explicitly charged or convicted for money laundering via the predicate offense of conversion, which the lower court affirmed.