News
Yahaya Bello’s name not in Govt House Bank account, funds withdrawal
EFCC witness says ex-Kogi Gov Bello not involved in Govt House account, funds withdrawal
A witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mrs Abimbola Williams has told a Federal High Court in Abuja that the name of former Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello did not feature in any of the account opening packages for Government House Bank account with the United Bank for Africa (UBA).
The witness, a Compliance Officer with UBA also admitted before the court that Bello’s name did not feature in all the withdrawals made from the account number 1003889575 managed by UBA for the Kogi Government House Administration while Yahaya Bello was the governor.
Testifying in a money laundering charges brought against the former governor by EFCC, the banker who was subpoenaed by court tendered the account opening packages for Government House Administration under the governorship of Bello.
The suboeana, according to the prosecution, requested for the production of the statement of account of one Maselina Njoku, from 1st January, 2019 to 31st December, 2020.
Led in evidence by EFCC counsel, Kemi Pinheiro SAN, the witness also tendered the account statements operated while Bello held sway as Chief Executive of Kogi state.
She read out series of withdrawals through cheques from the account for the government House operations.
Specifically, she named one Abdulsalami Hudu as the person handling fund withdrawals on behalf of the Government House.
However, under cross examination by Joseph Daudu SAN, the lead counsel to Yahaya Bello, the UBA Compliance Officer said that Bello’s name did not feature in virtually all transactions in respect of the bank account.
She also admitted that she was not the accounts officer of the Kogi Government House account and that the account is domiciled in Lokoja, Kogi State, and not in Area 3, Abuja, where she works.
The witness confirmed 10 withdrawals in favour of Abdulsalam Hudu, in the sum of N10 million each on December 12, 2018. She said the withdrawals were done with cheques and presented across the counter.
On cross-examination, the Defence Counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, asked the witness that, as a compliance officer, does her duty involve protecting the integrity of the bank from legal penalty, reputational damage and financial losses? “Yes,” she responded.
The witness was also asked to name the three signatories on the account, which she did.
For Alhaji Yakubu Ismail, who was Permanent Secretary, she said, “We only have his picture on this form.”
Daudu SAN asked, “Now, in both the account opening documents and the statement of account from E1 to E72, does the name ‘Yahaya Bello’ appear anywhere?”
“No, the name Yahaya Bello does not feature,” the witness responded.
The Defendant’s lawyer again asked, “Please look at Exhibit 2P1-3P62. Does the name ‘Yahaya Bello’ appear anywhere in the document?”
“My Lord, the name Yahaya Bello does not feature on the exhibits,” the witness answered.
Daudu SAN therefore closed his cross-examination.
The EFCC Counsel, moved to re-examine the witness. Daudu, SAN objected, but the judge allowed him after a brief argument.
Pinheiro SAN then asked the witness if she was familiar with the signature on the document.
She said she signed on behalf of one Edward Bananga.
But the Defendant’s Counsel again objected and moved to cross-examine the witness.
“My Lord, the witness initially disowned the signature, but under re-examination, the prosecution led her to admit it. Therefore, I have the right to challenge that admission and prove that her claim regarding the signature is incorrect,” he said.
“Cross examination is meant to prove the accuracy or veracity of the witness. I am entitled to disprove what she said. This is in the interest of justice,” Daudu SAN added.
He then asked the witness to read the document.
Reading from the document, she said, “I Edward Bananga hereby certified and confirmed that……”
‘I put it to you that You are not Edward Bananga,” the Defendant’s Counsel said.
“I am not Edward Bananga my lord,” the witness answered.
Another witness, Nicholas Ohehomon, from the American International School, was presented by the prosecution.
The exhibits tendered included the school’s statements of account, admission letters of the children of the defendant and payment receipts. The witness confirmed the different classes the children were admitted into.
Exhibit 12P was also tendered, which was a contractual agreement for post-paid school fees for the children.
The Prosecution presented a letter from the EFCC to AIS, Abuja, through the Registrar. It was marked Exhibit 18 and an account provided by the EFCC for a refund.
The court, thereafter, adjourned to 7th March for continuation of trial.
A federal high court in Abuja has granted permission to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to arrest and detain six Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX) promoters over allegations of investment fraud to the tune of over one billion dollars.
Emeka Nwite, the presiding judge, gave the order following an ex parte application moved by Fadila Yusuf, counsel to the EFCC.
In the application by the EFCC, the six suspects are Adefowora Olanipekun, Adefowora Oluwanisola, Emmanuel Uko, Seyi Oloyede, Avwerosuo Otorudo and Chukwuebuka Ehirim.
The commission sought an order of the court for a warrant of arrest of the defendants.
They also prayed the court for “an order remanding the defendants in the custody of the complainant/applicant pending the conclusion of investigation of the alleged offences and possible prosecution”.
Yusuf said that the defendants are at large and a warrant of arrest is required to arrest the defendants for proper investigation and prosecution of this case.
In the affidavit in support of the motion, the EFCC said preliminary investigation into the intel revealed that the defendants “using their company ST Technologies International Limited, promoted another company Crypto Bridge Exchange (CBEX) by making adverts and lured unsuspecting members of the public to invest crypto cryptocurrencies on the CBEX investment platform”.
The EFCC said the defendants promised an unrealistic return on investment of up to 100 percent.
“The victims were made to convert their digital assets into a stablecoin of USDT for onward deposit into the suspects’ crypto wallet,” Yusuf said.
“The victims were initially given full access to the platform to monitor their investment.
“Following the deposits valued at over $1 billion by the victims, the CBEX investment platform became inaccessible to them, and they could no longer withdraw from the investment made.
“The victims later discovered that the said scheme is a scam.
“During the course of investigation, it was discovered that the said ST Technologies International Limited, though registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), it was not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for investment purposes.
“It was also discovered during the investigation that the defendants had moved out of their last known address in Lagos and Ogun states.”
The anti-graft agency said obtaining a warrant of arrest was necessary in order to place the defendants on a watch list, enabling authorities to trace and apprehend the suspects to face the charges brought against them.
Nwite granted the request for a warrant of arrest and remand, adding that the order was necessary to enable the commission to apprehend the defendants and conclude its investigation.
“I have listened to the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant,” Nwite said.
“I have also gone through the affidavit evidence with exhibits thereto, along with the written address.
“I am of the view and I so hold that the application is meritorious.
“Consequently, the application is granted as prayed.”
The alleged certificate forgery brought against the Chairman of Abuja Municipal Area Council (AMAC), Honourable Christopher Zakka Maikalangu, has already been terminated by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice in Abuja.
The termination of the allegation by the AGF office followed the report of the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation (DPPF) to the effect that the allegation of the primary school leaving certificate cannot be sustained in any law court.
These facts are contained in a counter affidavit filed by an Abuja lawyer, Mr Charles Okoye against the fresh Direct Criminal Complaint of certificate forgery brought against the AMAC boss by a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Awalu Tanko Mohammed, in suit No. AB/ CR/DUT/324/2025, before a Magistrate Court in Abuja.
Okoye, while challenging the jurisdiction of Magistrate Abdullahi Ilelah, to assume trial in the certificate forgery allegation said in the counter affidavit that such an action by any court in the country would be an affront to the authority and powers of the AGF, as donated in the 1999 Constitution.
The defendant’s lawyer in the counter affidavit said that the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), FCT Police Command, Abuja, had upon completion of its investigation into the alleged certificate forgery presented its report to the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation, for review and possible next line of action.
He said that the DPPF after reviewing the findings of Police operatives came to the conclusion that the certificate forgery allegation cannot be substantiated in any law court as no concrete evidence was attached to the petition as an exhibit.
Okoye maintained that based on the findings of the DPPF and the subsequent recommendation, the office of the AGF terminated the complaint forthwith and therefore charged Magistrate Ilelah to discountenance the fresh Direct Criminal Complaint filed by the aggrieved APC chieftain before the court.
Similarly, the counsel stated that the issue of primary school certificate forgery was raised in 2022 at the AMAC Election Petition Tribunal and was dismissed for want of merit by the tribunal.
The lawyer maintained that masquerading the same allegation under any guise is a mere waste of the precious judicial time of the Magistrate Court and a ploy to settle old scores with the AMAC boss.
At Thursday’s proceedings, the AMAC chairman could not attend the court due to his appointment with the National Hospital, Abuja, for medical checkups.
His counsel, Charles Okoye told Magistrate Ilelah that he had already written a letter on the reason for AMAC chairman’s absence in court and prayed the court for an adjournment of the proceedings.
Counsel to the complainant, Mr Job Peter Israel did not object to adjournment request but however stated that the medical report attached to the application for adjournment should not be believed by the court.
At the instance of the two lawyers, Magistrate Ilelah fixed May 23, for either arraignment or mention of the Direct Criminal Complaint.
The Human and Environmental Development Agenda (HEDA Resource Centre), has lamented the high level of corruption in Nigeria’s judicial system.
HEDA, a non-governmental organisation, stated this as part of findings contained in the fifth edition of the Leadership Approval Rating (LAR).
The report titled, “Voices for Justice: A Civic Lens on Nigeria’s Judicial System – Documenting Public Experiences, Opinions & Reform Demands,” and unveiled by the Human and Environmental Development Agenda (HEDA Resource Centre), on Tuesday in Lagos.
It said about 65.4 % of the public rate judicial corruption as high or extremely high.
It also said the report showed that only 42.3% believed that court decisions are based on merit while 64% believed that lawyers contribute to judicial corruption.
The Executive Secretary of HEDA, Arigbabu Sulaimon, told journalists present at the event that the report was a nationwide analysis of public perception regarding the Nigerian judiciary and built from the responses of 1,357 participants across all 36 states and the FCT.
“The demographic of those who took part in the survey for the report were fairly balanced with 53.9% male and 46.1% female; 57% of the respondents were aged 18-35, reflecting a strong youth engagement and every Nigerian state had over 30 responses with Yobe State having over 50 responses.
“The findings reveal widespread concerns on judicial accessibility, corruption, political interference and the erosion of human rights protections,” he said.
Sulaimon explained that 80% of participants to the report said they had never interacted with the courts, and only 12.6% rated the courts as highly accessible while 36.5% rated accessibility very low.
He said, “Legal visits to the courts were mostly for documents such as affidavits and agreements as well as for settlement of land and marital disputes and enforcement of rights.
“On the corruption perception index, 49% of court users surveyed admitted to “sorting” court officials while only 29% consider judges impartial.
“55% believe lawyers promote justice while 45% disagree. 62% also felt that judges were not upholding the principle of being “heard and not seen.
“On political influence, “63.4% say political/high profile cases expose judges to corruption while 48.9% said political cases get prioritised causing delay for other matters”.
The report also identified political, financial crimes, land and human rights cases as being most vulnerable to undue influence.
On judicial independence and oversight, HEDA said “only 17% of the participants trust the National Judicial Council (NJC) to discipline erring judges while 70% say they are unaware of the reporting channels for corruption or misconduct”.
It also said “59%, however, agreed that financial autonomy moderately boosts judicial independence”.
On human rights and law enforcement, it said, “60 % of the participants say courts enable police abuse and impose rights-violating bail conditions”.
“Major recommendations made include strict judicial oversight, enforcement of constitutional rights and prose of abusive officers.
“While courts and corruption cases are reported regularly, only about half of the respondents say these stories reach the general public consistently while only 9% of Nigerians say that they actively follow NJC related news.”
Key reform suggested include full judicial autonomy and transparent appointments, better salaries and security for judges, strong anti corruption mechanisms, use of technology for transparency (e.g. live -streams, body cams, et cetera, during court sessions), public awareness and legal education as well as creation of special human rights courts.