‘If Sheriff Is A Goliath, Then He Has Met His David’, Says Fani-Kayode

Fani-KayodeChief Femi Fani-Kayode has reacted to Senator Ali Modu Sheriff’s threat that he will be dealt with.

The former Aviation Minister, in a statement made available to Channels Television, said he is amused by the Senator’s threat and he is waiting with baited breath for his actions.

Mr Fani-Kayode who is a member of the PDP and one of the party leaders who are unhappy with the process which brought Senator Ali Modu Sheriff as the new PDP national chairman, criticised the emergence of the former governor of Borno State as the new PDP Chairman, raising allegations of a link of the new party leader with the Boko Haram sect, a terrorist group which has killed hundreds of innocent Nigerians since it began its operations few years ago.

The former minister says “we are more than ready to meet Senator Ali Modu Sheriff in court. It would be a pleasure to expose him for what he is. The days of intimidating, silencing and threatening others are long over.

“If sheriff is a Goliath, let him be rest assured that he has finally met his David. Needless to say we stand by everything that we have said,”he added.


Court To Rule On EFCC’s Prosecution Team Against Fani-Kayode On Tuesday

A Federal High Court Judge in Lagos, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia has fixed, Tuesday 25th of June to rule on whether the prosecution team of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) led by Festus Keyamo can prosecute the money laundering case involving former Aviation Minister, Femi Fani-Kayode.

Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia fixed the date after lawyers in the matter adopted their written addresses.

The former Aviation Minister is standing trial before on a 47-count charge of laundering about N230million filed against him by the EFCC.

At the last sitting of the court on June 6, Fani-Kayode’s counsel; Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), had challenged the appearance of the prosecutor, one Vitalis Ahaotu from the law firm of Festus Keyamo.

Counsel to the former Minister wondered whether the law firm had obtained the fiat of the Attorney General of the Federation to prosecute the matter or was prosecuting on behalf of the EFCC.

The Prosecutor has however countered by arguing that neither the defendant nor the court can inquire into the propriety of a counsel’s appearance in a criminal trial especially where the counsel has been properly briefed by his client.