Court Bars Abuja MD From Traveling Abroad Over Alleged Organ Harvesting

A Federal Capital Territory, (FCT), High Court presided over by Justice Keziah Ogbonnaya, has barred the managing Director of Abuja-based Alliance Hospital, Dr. Christopher Otabor, from traveling outside Nigeria over a case of alleged organ harvest.

It was gathered that 52-year-old Dr. Otabor, three staff of his hospital and Alliance Hospital, were arraigned before the court on charges of organ harvesting brought against them by the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons, (NAPTIP).

NAPTIP spokesperson, Vincent Adekoye in a statement said the defendants were slammed with an 11-count charge bothering on the procurement of persons, accommodation of persons, and performing surgical operations on three victims namely Adebayo Salaudeen Saliman, male (17 years), Yahaya Musa, male (17 years), and Aminu Yahuza, male (25 years), for the removal of their organ (kidney).

READ: Commotion As Witness Slumps, Dies Inside Court

“The offences were said to be contrary to Section 20 subsection two (2) (a) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Enforcement and Administration Act, 2015 and punishable under Section 20 subsection (2) (b) of same Act.

“It could also be recalled that while ruling on the bail application by Counsel to the defendants on the date of their arraignment, the Presiding Judge, Hon. Justice Keziah Ogbonnaya, granted them bail on two conditions.

“First, they are to report daily at NAPTIP Headquarters, Abuja and sign a register to that effect while the second condition is that they will deposit their traveling documents with the Court,” the statement contains.

However, Counsel to Dr. Otabor who is the 4th defendant in the case, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, had filed an application for the court to vary the afore stated bail conditions to enable him to retrieve his passport, apply for a Polish Visa, and travel out of Nigeria to Poland, to see his sick son who is in a medical university in Warsaw.

The defence counsel had argued that Dr. Otabor has continued to fulfill the bail condition by reporting daily at NAPTIP headquarters except on dates slated for the court sittings.

He further told the court that Dr. Otabor has not interfered with the proceedings of the court in any manner, hence the request for the bail variation.

He also submitted that Dr. Otabor is the Chief Medical Director of the renowned Alliance Hospital, Abuja, with numerous employees, stressing that he will not jump bail.

But the prosecution, (NAPTIP), vehemently opposed the application through its lead Counsel, the Director, Legal and Prosecution Department, NAPTIP, Mr Hassan Tahir who submitted to the Court that the application lacks merit.

Mr. Tahir also submitted that apart from the fact that the 4th defendant has nothing to show that his son is sick abroad as claimed, he has not proposed a condition for the variation of his bail condition and also failed to provide a surety to stand for him hence grating him a variation that will enable him travel out of Nigeria is tantamount to releasing him without security for his bail.

In her ruling, Justice Ogbonnaya, reminded both parties that even though bail is the right of any person, the court has the exclusive and discretionary power to grant a variation of conditions stipulated for bail.

Pointing that the case at hand is purely a criminal trial and that the 4th defendant, (Dr. Otabor is the arrowhead of the 5th defendant (Alliance Hospital), the judge said he has failed to show in any document the nature of the illness of his son nor the name and location of the hospital where he is going to visit his son, adding that the court is not a court of emotions especially as no person was presented to stand in his stead or a bail bond.

Based on these, the defendant’s bail application was not granted as this would amount to the court setting him free.

The Court was also mindful that the defence has not opened its case as yet and a hearing on a no-case submission advanced by the defence has been fixed for July, 2nd, 2024.

“The Court does not feel that granting the application will be in the interest of justice in this case”, the judge ruled to dismiss the application for lacking merit.