Eunisell MD, Ikenga, admits Amadi remitted money into Eunisell account. His only problem was that it came from him and not A-Z
By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
In continuation of the cross-examination in the trial of Mr Kenneth Amadi (1st defendant) over alleged N2.9 billion fraud, the managing director of Eunisell Ltd Mr Chika Ikenga told a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos that the money paid to Amadi through his company came from A-Z and Ammasco, not from Eunisell account.
He, however, said that the money was paid into Eunisell account by the 2nd defendant.
When confronted that there were payments into Eunisell account but his problem was that the money were paid by 1st and 2nd defendants, he said ‘yes.’
When asked if Eunisell in writing demanded an explanation from the defendants why AZ made payments to them instead of Eunisell, Mr Ikenga said “we did not do that.”
RELATED
Eunisell didn’t issue query to ex-employee for indirect payment, witness tells court
Chika Ikenga was testifying as the first prosecution witness in the charge brought against 1st and 2nd defendants by the Attorney-General of the Federation.
He was being cross-examined by O.J. Akinwale, defence counsel for Mr Kenneth Amadi and IDID, before Justice Ambrose Lewis Allagoa.
Mrs Aderonke Imana announced an appearance for prosecution while Mr O.J. Akinwale who took over from Mr Emeka Etiaba (SAN) announced an appearance for defence.
“We received some money from the first defendant and he told us that they came from A-Z and Ammasco. As the CEO, we took his words for that.”
When asked if the money received was returned since it didn’t come directly from A-Z and Ammasco, the witness said “No, we just complained to the Police and EFCC.”
Defence counsel: How much is A-Z Petroleum owing your company as of 17th February 2017?
Ikenga: N103 million
Defence counsel: They are not owing N2.9 billion?
Ikenga: He received N2.9 billion into his account without authorization.
Defence counsel: How much was Ammasco International owing as of 17th February 2017?
Ikenga: I wouldn’t say because we continued to do business with Amasco and they were paying us. I will have to check our records. However, at the point when the first defendant had left our employment and we called Ammasco, I think they were owing about N400 and something million.
Defence counsel: And they agreed they are owing you that money?
Ikenga: Yes, they did agree.
Defence counsel: The money paid to 1st and 2nd defendants came from A-Z Petroleum and Ammasco and not from the Eunisell account?
Ikenga: They came from A-Z and Amasco but not from the Eunisell account.
Defence counsel: How regular do you check and reconcile customer’s credit account? Is it monthly, quarterly or yearly?
Ikenga: We would generally reconcile those accounts yearly, however our C E O was also in charge of the accounts. We just barely take his words and that formed a large part of our reconciliation.
Defence counsel: Is the 1st and 2nd defendants a signatory or mandate to the account of Eunisell?
Ikenga: The first and second defendants are not, however they are also not authorized to receive our money.
Defence counsel: You are also not a director nor officer of Lubrizon.
Ikenga: I am not.
When further asked if he tendered any document to the court showing payment details, he said ‘no’ but it was given to the police for their investigation.
The witness confirmed that there was no letter from either A-Z or Ammasco to Eunisell stating that the first and second defendants are being fraudulent.
When further asked if he has seen the response of A-Z to the police after his petition, the witness said “Yes.” At this point, the letter from A-Z to the police was shown to the witness which he confirmed.
The witness told the court that before he set up Eunisell, he worked with Ibachem Ltd, a joint venture between Oteri Holdings and a company in the USA. He said Oteri Holdings was owned by Ibru.
The defence counsel concluded his cross-examination of the witness. The witness was then discharged by the trial judge.
The matter has been adjourned to January 20 and 21 for the continuation of trial.
Meanwhile, Mr Emeka Etiaba (SAN) who was the lead defence counsel for the defendant, announced before the presiding judge that he was disengaging himself from continuing as counsel for the defendants. He cited the wrong media reports of the case as one of his reasons for withdrawing his services to the defendants.
When the judge asked the first defendant if he needs adjournment in order to get another lawyer, Mr Amadi told the court that he wants the second defence counsel Mr O.J. Akinwale to continue. The judge then granted the prayers of Etiaba to disengage from the matter.
