By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
An Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness, Adebayo Adeniyi (PW1), has on Wednesday December 9, 2020, in the resumed trial of former Speaker of Lagos State House of Assembly, Adeyemi Ikuforiji, told a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos that the Commission did not receive any petition for money laundering against the 1st defendant (Ikuforiji).
The prosecution witness, an investigator with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was responding to the cross-examination by the defence counsel, Mr Dele Adesina (SAN), in the money laundering charge against the defendants before Justice Mohammed Liman.
Ikuforiji is standing trial alongside his former Personal Assistant, Oyebode Atoyebi, on a 54-count charge bordering on alleged N338.8 million money laundering.
They had pleaded not guilty before Justice Mohammed Liman and were allowed to continue on an earlier bail granted to them in 2012 when they were first arraigned.
Trial has since commenced before Justice Liman and the prosecution is still leading witnesses in evidence.
At the last adjourned date on November 25, during examination in chief, the witness PW1 had testified that investigations into the case involving the 1st defendant was triggered by a petition filed by an agency.
At the resumed trial on Wednesday, defence counsel, Mr Adesina (SAN) continued cross examination of the witness and asked: “At the last adjourned date you gave evidence that a petition written by a Nigerian anti corruption agency triggered off your investigation “?
The witness replied, “Yes.”
Adesina urged the witness to take a look at a document representing photocopy of the said petition, indicating a call for investigation into a N7billion fraud, and the witness confirmed same.
When asked if the original was in custody of the EFCC, he replied ” It should be”
Defence counsel then asked the witness if in the course of his investigation he found any allegations of N7billion fraud established against the first defendant.
Responding, the witness explained that he did not investigate fraud, therefore could only answer questions pertaining money laundering.
Rephrasing his question , Adesina asked again, “Your investigation was made on money laundering, did you receive any petition on money laundering agasint the defendant”
He answered “No, I did not”
On whether it is correct to say that institutions acts through human beings, the witness replied “Yes”
After defence had concluded his cross examination of the witness the prosecutor, Mr Ekene Iheanacho informed the court that his second witness (PW2) was around and sought to call Mr Adewale Taiwo, a former clerk of the House.
But after being sworn on oath, the defence counsel, objected to the presence of the witness in the box, arguing that the name of the witness was not listed in the proof of evidence, adding “He has just brought this witness from the moon”
However, the court confirmed from its record that the witness was subpoenaed but added that he could not be found in the wintess’ statement on oath.
Opposing the presence of the witness, Adesina urged the prosecutor to do the needful inorder to make progress in. the case, or close its case if it deems it fit as it had already called its principal witness.
He added that he would oblige an adjournment.
Consequently, the court adjourned the case until February 3, 2021 for continuation of trial.
The defendants were first arraigned on March 1, 2012 before Justice Okechukwu Okeke on a 20-count charge bordering on misappropriation and money laundering.
They had each pleaded not guilty to the charges and were granted bails.
The defendants were, however, subsequently re-arraigned before Justice Ibrahim Buba, following a re-assignment of the case.
Buba had granted them bail in the sum of N500 million each with sureties in like sum
On September 26, 2014, Justice Buba discharged Ikuforiji and his aide of the charges, after upholding a ‘no case submission’ of the defendants.
Buba had held that the EFCC failed to establish a prima-facie case against them.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, the EFCC through its counsel, Mr Godwin Obla (SAN), filed the Notice of Appeal dated September 30, 2014 challenging the decision of the trial court.
Obla had argued that the trial court erred in law when it held that the counts were incompetent because they were filed under Section 1(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004 which was repealed by an Act of 2011.
EFCC further argued that the lower court erred in law when it held that the provisions of Section 1 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004 and 2011, only applied to natural persons and corporate bodies other than the Government.
The commission had also submitted that the trial judge erred in law when he held and concluded that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses supported the innocence of the respondents.
In its judgement, the Lagos Division of the Appeal Court, in November 2016, agreed with the prosecution and ordered a fresh trial of the defendants before another judge.
According to the Anti-graft Commission, the
offences, allegedly committed by the defendants contravene the provisions of Sections 15 (1d), 16(1d) and 18 of Money Laundering Act, 2004 and 2011.
