Daddy And Mummy GO Sentenced To 10 Years Imprisonment For N52m Fraud, Church Closed Down
Justice Mojisola Dada of the Lagos High Court, Ikeja, has handed down a 10-year imprisonment sentence to a couple, Harry Uyanwanne and Oluwakemi Odemuyiwa (also known as Kristein Uyanwanne), alongside closingTemple International Church, for stealing N52 million.
In a landmark ruling, Justice Dada also ordered the deregistration and closure of Temple International Church, citing its use of religion as a cover to defraud unsuspecting individuals.
Details of the Conviction
The defendants faced a seven-count charge brought against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). Following a trial that commenced on February 25, 2020, Justice Dada declared that the prosecution had proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sentencing:
– Harry Uyanwanne: Sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, with terms running concurrently.
– Oluwakemi Odemuyiwa: Sentenced to six years imprisonment, also to run concurrently.
– Temple International Church: Ordered to be deregistered and permanently shut down.
The court further directed the convicts to restitute N31 million to the complainant within 60 days.
Fraudulent Acts
The EFCC’s case centred on allegations that the defendants, in March 2016, dishonestly converted N10 million belonging to the late Mrs. Odemuyiwa Janet Adeola for personal use. They were also accused of fraudulently selling a property located at Plot 32, Block 9, Magodo Residential Scheme 1, Ikeja, for N42 million to one Mr. Kingsley Atere, under the false pretence of having authorisation from the rightful owner.
Judicial Rationale
Justice Dada found the couple guilty on counts one to six but acquitted them on count seven. The sentences for the couple and the church are to run concurrently. The offences violated sections of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act No. 14 of 2006 and the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011.
Prosecution Overview
During the trial, EFCC counsel Mr. Babatunde Sonoiki presented five witnesses to substantiate the charges, while the defence called two witnesses. The court held that the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to secure a conviction.
