Kwara Poly’s “Hanky-Panky” Tactics Exposed As Informant247 Demands Evidence

The management of The Informant247 has called on the Rector of Kwara State Polytechnic to release the necessary documents to substantiate the charges against its Editor-in-Chief and Managing Director, accusing the institution of playing “hanky-panky” with the judicial process.

The Police in Kwara State had dragged the medium’s Editor-in-Chief, Salihu Ayatullahi, and Managing Director, Azeez Adisa Jaji, to court over a report exposing corruption at the polytechnic.

In a statement issued by the Publisher, Salihu Shola Taofeek, over the weekend, he said that for the past three months, Ayatullahi and Jaji have appeared in court no fewer than six times.

Initial hearings were marked by the prosecutors’ failure to present a convincing case, with charges shifting from cyberstalking and criminal conspiracy to defamation and criminal conspiracy.

Despite claiming to have concluded their investigation by the fifth hearing, prosecutors have yet to produce the promised evidence.

At the sixth hearing, prosecutors cited a lack of fuel for their vehicle as the reason for not bringing witnesses or documents, leading to another adjournment.

The statement reads, “Over the past three months, the two and our other management staff have willingly appeared in court eight times on these charges. While we were able to secure the release of our arrested staff at the first appearance, subsequent appearances have been marked by the prosecutors’ failure to prove their case against us.

“At the second hearing, the prosecutor claimed to be conducting investigation and sought an adjournment. However, at the third hearing, the prosecutor changed the charges from cyberstalking and criminal conspiracy to defamation and criminal conspiracy, still claiming they were conducting an investigation during the fourth hearing, thus unnecessarily prolonging the case.

“At the fifth appearance, the prosecutor stated they had concluded their investigation and were ready for trial. Our lawyer asked the court to direct the prosecutor to submit their evidence against us. The court granted this request, and the prosecutor promised to do so at the next hearing.

“While we hoped the prosecutor would be prepared for the sixth hearing, they claimed they could not mobilise the witness and documents to court, citing lack of fuel in their car! The case was adjourned to a later date, which did not hold due to a minor reshuffling at the magistrate court.

“This has been the tactic the Rector and Management of the Polytechnic have been employing since the beginning of the case. While we, as a medium, are ready to provide every piece of evidence to back our claim of the shoddy and uncompleted job commissioned by the Rector, we also challenge the Rector not to sweep the report of the institution’s financial status under the carpet. This will give both parties ample opportunity and fairness to prove our cases before the court.

“All that has happened only strengthens our determination to uphold journalistic integrity and ensure transparency in public office. We remain steadfast in our mission to uncover the truth and hold those in power accountable, undeterred by any attempts to silence or intimidate us.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button