EFCC, Defence Clash as Court Fixes April 24 for Key Ruling in Bello Case

L

Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled April 24 for ruling on whether the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) can alter the evidence of its witness by presenting his initial statement to the Commission.

The judge fixed the date on Thursday during the ongoing alleged money laundering trial of the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello.
Counsel to the former governor, Joseph Daudu, SAN, had objected to the move by EFCC counsel, Mr. Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, to re-present Exhibit 46, which is the statement of the 12th prosecution witness to the EFCC.
Daudu, SAN, argued that in order to contradict its witness, the prosecution must first seek the leave of the court to declare the witness hostile.
This followed testimony in court that appeared inconsistent with what the witness, Abdullahi Jamilu, had earlier written in his statement.
The EFCC witness, who owns Kumfayakum Global Limited, stated that he converted funds deposited into his account by one Abba Adaudu into United States dollars and handed them over to him at different times, either at his own office or at the recipient’s office in Abuja.
When asked if he had delivered the funds at any other location apart from the offices of both parties, the witness said he could only confirm deliveries at the office.
At that point, the prosecution counsel sought to show the witness his earlier statement to the EFCC, but the defence counsel objected.
“My Lord, I object. If learned counsel intends to contradict his witness, he must first apply to have him declared a hostile witness.
“The witness has clearly stated that the transactions took place only at his office and that of Abba Adaudu. Counsel cannot rely on this document to contradict or augment the witness’s oral evidence without following due procedure,” he argued.
In response, the prosecution counsel said he was merely attempting to refresh the witness’s memory, noting that the transactions occurred in 2022.
He referred the court to Section 239(1), (2), and (3) of the Evidence Act (formerly Section 218), which allows a witness to refresh memory, and cited authorities to support his argument.
However, the defence counsel maintained that the cases cited were not applicable to his objection.
“My contention is that my learned counsel is attempting to treat his witness as hostile by confronting him with prior statements already tendered as exhibits.
“This amounts to contradiction without first seeking leave of court to declare the witness hostile, contrary to Section 230 of the Evidence Act.
“I further rely on Ibe v. State (1997) LPELR-1389 (SC), which addresses the consequences of breaching this provision,” Daudu, SAN, stated.
Following the arguments, Justice Nwite adjourned proceedings to April 24, 2026, for ruling on the matter and continuation of the trial.
Earlier, during his examination-in-chief, the 12th prosecution witness said he did not make any cash deposits at the Lokoja branch of Access Bank.
He explained that the name Abdullahi Jemilu or Jemilu Abdullahi might have been used in the narration of the deposits, but insisted he did not carry them out.
Regarding transactions dated October 8 and 11, 2021, and March 17, 2022, he stated that one Abba Adaudu made the deposits at the Lokoja branch.
He added that after receiving the funds from Abba Adaudu, he converted them into US dollars and handed them back to him.
The witness was also shown Exhibit 37(1), the statement of account of Kumfayakum Global Limited, particularly entries for December 15 and 17, 2021.
He identified transactions from Keyless Nature Limited, including a N100 million transfer on December 15 and N400 million on December 17, 2021.
The witness further informed the court that Keyless Nature Limited is owned by Abba Adaudu.
He also confirmed a transaction dated February 18, 2022, involving an inflow from Ejadams Essence Limited into his account.
The court subsequently adjourned to April 24, 2026, for ruling on whether the prosecution can re-present Exhibit 46 and for continuation of the trial.