Arraignment of Binance Executive Delayed as Court Adjourns Trial
Read Time:2 Minute, 27 Second
A Federal High Court in Abuja has postponed the arraignment of a Binance Holdings Limited executive and the company itself on charges of money laundering. The trial judge, Justice Emeka Nwite, adjourned the proceedings until April 8 after hearing arguments regarding the service of the charge on Binance Holdings Limited.
Binance Holdings Limited and Tigran Gambaryan, the defendants, had a scheduled arraignment on Thursday on five counts related to money laundering. However, the objections raised by Mark Mordi, the counsel for the second defendant, resulted in the stall of the arraignment.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has accused Binance, Gambaryan, and Nadeem Anjarwalla, who is currently at large, of concealing the source of $35.4 million generated as revenue by Binance in Nigeria. The EFCC alleges that the funds are proceeds of unlawful activity and that the defendants committed the offenses between January and December 2023 in Abuja, contravening Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
During the proceedings, Mordi contended that the EFCC’s failure to serve the charge on Binance Holdings Limited properly prevented his client from being arraigned. Mordi argued that the company did not properly nominate his client to receive the charge on its behalf, and he further advocated for separate service to be provided to each defendant.
In response, the counsel for the EFCC, E.E. Iheanacho, claimed that the second defendant is a representative of the first defendant, Binance Holdings Limited.
Iheanacho stated that he had served the charge on the second defendant on behalf of the company, but the second defendant rejected it. He further argued that the court could enter a not-guilty plea for the second defendant and proceed with the trial under Section 478 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015.
Mordi countered Iheanacho’s submission by highlighting the omission of Section 477 of the Act and emphasizing that his client lacked authorization from the company to receive the charge. He emphasized the significance of adhering to due process and asserted that the service had not completed on the first defendant.
In his response, Iheanacho voiced his belief that the second defendant qualifies as an agent of Binance and put forth an argument for considering the attempted service on the first defendant through the second defendant as valid. He urged the court to enter a not-guilty plea for Binance and suggested that the company should challenge the decision.
The court ultimately decided to adjourn the case until April 8 to rule on the issue of service. The arraignment of the Binance executive and the company will experience a delay until this matter is resolved.
The outcome of this case is of significant interest, as it involves allegations of money laundering against Binance, one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges. The legal proceedings will continue to draw attention as the court addresses the issue of proper service and the subsequent arraignment of the defendants.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
1
0
All necessary investigation should be carried out and if they are found guilty they should be apprehended according to the law
See hot case