Ekweremadu: Why the Senator’s defense strategy is very weak — By Emeka Ugwuonye

From a preliminary assessment of Ekweremadu’s case, it is easy to conclude that his defenses, so far, are feeble. He is focused on showing that the victim is not a minor. If that’s all he has, I am afraid he will be found guilty of a very serious crime and will have to face years in British prison. Let’s look at it closely.

First, Ekweremadu is basing his defense on the age of the victim. His efforts has centered on showing that David Ukpo is 21-years old, instead of 15-years old. But if you look at the law under which he was charged and the charge itself, the age of the victim is immaterial. The charge reads “conspiracy to arrange/facilitate travel of “another person” with a view to exploitation, namely organ harvesting”. So, it doesn’t really matter whether the victim is 15 or 21 or even 55, as long as you arranged or helped in arranging his travel for the purpose of “exploitation”.

What Ekweremadu’s lawyers are supposed to be arguing is either:

(1) That he did not arrange or facilitate David’s travel. Of course, he can’t argue this. It is obvious that he arranged David’s travel from Nigeria to the UK.

(2) That it was not for the purpose of “exploitation”. This is actually where the case lies. Was this whole arrangement for the purpose of exploitation or was it not? Remember that the law does not allow you to pay for organs. So, Ekweremadu has no option of showing that he paid adequate compensation as a way of showing there was no exploitation. He cannot say that he intended to pay “full price of human kidney” because there is no monetary price for human body parts. It boils down to how David met the Ekweremadus. Did he know them before? For instance, if David was Sonia’s boyfriend and he knew that Sonia needed a kidney and he offered to help his girlfriend by donating his kidney to her, that will remove the element of exploitation. The fact that he approached and offered to help his girlfriend would eliminate the exploitation factor. But that was not what happened.

Even if the above scenario had occurred, Ekweremadu was still expected to take several steps to ensure that David knew exactly what he was offering. For instance, Ekweremadu could have asked to meet the parents or guardian of David to make sure they were aware of what their child was offering. Also, assuming the Ekweremadu had gone through some credible intermediary agency such as a church or other organization to arrange for a person willing to help out, that could protect him from allegations of exploitation.

Also, Ekweremadu has not been able to show various steps he took in Nigeria to ensure that David “offered” (not just “agreed”) to donate his kidney before leaving Nigeria. If they waited until David got to the UK before they made him aware of why he was in UK to do, then they have committed the crime. Note that the crime of conspiracy was complete the moment they “planned to get him a visa to UK for the purpose of him giving his kidney”. That offense seems to have been completed as far back as last year. NOTE: If you use the word “agreed”, you should be prepared to show the Agreement/contract between the parties. And there is none.

As you can see from the affidavit filed by Ekweremadu’s lawyers in Nigeria, which I attached below, you will come to the conclusion that Ekweremadu is in a bad shape.

You can see that the British prosecutors know what they are doing. Look at how they drafted the charge. They came with conspiracy and they did not state in the charge that the victim was a minor. Instead, they used the term “another person”. They charged the offence they already have enough evidence to prove. I believe that eventually, the prosecutors will add more charges with more information from further investigation. They don’t file charges just to intimidate a person. They file charges after they are sure they have sufficient evidence to get a conviction.

Indeed, we hope Ekweremadu gets help from Nigerian Government by way of a high level diplomatic intervention. Otherwise, he is going in. But unfortunately, Nigerian Government is getting indicted in this case as well. The confusion over the real age of David has forced Ekweremadu to sue several agencies over the matter. The suit is either trying to suggest that Nigerian government issued passport to David with wrong information. Or, the suit is calculated to show that Nigerian Government is not cooperating with Ekweremadu against David, that it took a court order to force the agencies to release information on David to Ekweremadu. That is really not a bright move. The British are reading meanings into such moves. Besides, even if you prove that David is 21, instead of 15, that will not make any difference to the charge Ekweremadu is standing trial for.

Emeka Ugwuonye is a Harvard trained attorney and founder of Due Process Advocates International (DPA)