By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA– A Excessive Court docket of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, sitting at Maitama, on Thursday, rejected three subpoenaed witnesses the Financial and Monetary Crimes Fee, EFCC, sought to supply in opposition to the previous Governor of the Central Financial institution of Nigeria, CBN, Mr. Godwin Emefiele.
The court docket, in a ruling that was delivered by Justice Hamza Muazu, held that names of the witnesses had been in an inventory of extra proof of proof the anti-graft company sought to tender within the case, which was struck out on March 20.
It held that because the prosecution had already appealed in opposition to the choice, it ought to await the decision of the Court docket of Enchantment on the eligibility of the proposed witnesses to testify within the matter.
“The ruling of March 20 is now the topic of an enchantment. This court docket can’t change its personal determination by permitting these subpoenaed witnesses to testify. The prosecution should anticipate the choice of the Court docket of Enchantment,” Justice Muazu held.
Consequently, he adjourned the case to January 29, 2026, for continuation of the listening to.
Emefiele, who held sway as governor of the apex financial institution from 2014 to 2023, is answering to a 20-count cost bordering on his alleged complicity in procurement fraud totalling about N1.2billion.
The anti-graft company, within the amended cost earlier than the court docket marked: FCT/HC/CR/577/2023, alleged that he illegally awarded contracts for the acquisition of 43 automobiles, between 2018 and 2020, value N1.2bn.
He was equally accused of giving a corrupt benefit to at least one Mrs. Sa’adatu Ramallan Yaro, a employees member of the CBN, by awarding her personal firm, April 1616 Funding Ltd, a contract for the procurement of 37 Toyota Hilux Automobiles valued at N854million.
On the resumed continuing within the matter on October 22, the defendant, who had since pleaded his innocence to the cost, by means of his crew of legal professionals led by Mr. Mathew Burkaa, SAN, opposed EFCC’s bid to current the eleventh prosecution witness, PW-11, who was recognized as Alvan Grumman.
The defence lawyer famous that the identify of the witness was within the checklist of extra proof of proof dated October 15, 2024, which the court docket beforehand rejected.
He argued that because the witness was a part of the checklist the court docket struck out within the ruling it delivered on March 20, 2025, it was procedurally improper for the EFCC to hunt to reintroduce the identical witness by means of the again door.
Burkaa, SAN, additional famous that the EFCC had since utilized for permission to enchantment in opposition to the trial court docket’s determination.
Whereas urging the court docket to reaffirm its earlier ruling, Emefiele’s lawyer accused the anti-graft company of participating in gross abuse of the judicial course of.
The defence lawyer equally superior the identical argument with respect to 2 different proposed witnesses.
On his half, EFCC’s lawyer, Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, insisted that the defendant didn’t problem the looks of Grumman as a witness, in an objection he initially raised to problem the extra proof of proof that was rejected by the court docket.
In accordance with him, the defendant was particularly against the proof of the 2 different witnesses- Tommy Odama and Ifeanyi Omeke.
The prosecution counsel added that the proposed eleventh witness, Grumman, was a part of the crew that investigated the defendant.
He, due to this fact, urged the court docket to permit him to seem earlier than it to elucidate all he is aware of concerning the case.
Oyedepo, SAN, informed the court docket that the prosecution filed two separate functions for the subpoena of witnesses whose proof he stated would help the choose to reach at a simply dedication of the case.
Nonetheless, Emefiele’s counsel maintained that the events had been sure by the subsisting determination of the trial court docket.
The court docket had earlier rejected EFCC’s utility on the premise that it sought to introduce contemporary proof within the matter, over a yr after the cost was filed.
Whereas upholding an objection the embattled former CBN boss filed in opposition to the applying, the court docket held that the EFCC had on February 12, 2024, additionally filed extra proof of proof in opposition to the defendant.
Justice Muazu held that it was the stated extra proof that accommodated the testimony of a former Secretary to the Authorities of the Federation, Mr Boss Mustapha, in addition to that of 1 Bamayi Haruna Mairiga.
He burdened that the motion of the EFCC had a semblance of an try and deny truthful listening to to the defendant who took his plea on November 16, 2023, since he was not confronted with the brand new proof throughout investigation, as required by regulation.
The court docket equally held that the motion of the prosecuting company amounted to trial by ambush and a transparent case of fishing for proof within the trial that commenced since November 28, 2023.
It was the place of the trial choose that permitting the extra proof of proof after the cost had been amended severally could be prejudicial to the defendant as his proper to truthful listening to could be jeopardised.
He held that the regulation made it clear that investigation should have been accomplished and a prima facie case established, earlier than a cost is most popular in opposition to a defendant.
However, the court docket declined Emefiele’s plea for the cost in opposition to him to be struck out for being a product of an incomplete or ongoing investigation and due to this fact speculative.
It held that the cost couldn’t be struck out because the defendant and the prosecution had already joined points with one another and the trial nearly accomplished.
Justice Muazu held that having gone thus far, justice could be served if the trial was accomplished on its advantage and closing judgment delivered within the matter.
He additional declined to expunge the proof of the previous SGF, Mustapha and Bamayi Haruna Mairiga, from the court docket’s information as requested by Emefiele who contended that proof of the 2 witnesses was offensive to the tenets of truthful listening to enshrined in part 36 (2) of the 1999 Structure, as amended.
The submit Emefiele’s Trial: Court docket rejects EFCC’s witnesses, adjourns case to Jan 29 appeared first on Vanguard Information.
