By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka

Senior Correspondent

A Prosecution witness Mr Usman Zakari has told Justice R M Aikawa of a Federal High Court,Lagos that
Dele Belgore (first defendant) admitted collecting the sum of N450 million from the former petroleum minister Mrs Diezani Allison-Madueke for disbursement to compromise the 2015 general elections
The information was made in the court on Monday by Zakari during the cross examination commenced by Mr E O Shofunde (SAN),counsel to first defendant.
However, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) counsel Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, had opposed a line of cross examination by the defence counsel, in the fraud trial of Dele Belgore.
Belgore is standing alongside with a former Minister of National Planning, Prof. Abubakar Suleiman, on an amended five counts charge of fraud.
Former petroleum minister, Diezani Allison-Madueke, who was said to be at large was fingered as a culprit in the criminal trial of Belgore and Sulaiman.
The anti-graft agency claimed that the N500 million was part of the sum of 115 million dollars which the former minister allegedly doled out to compromise the 2015 general elections.
At the resumption of trial on Monday, counsel to the first accused, Mr E. O Shofunde (SAN) commenced a cross examination of the second prosecution witness, Mr Usman Zakari.
On the timeline of events leading to the prosecution of the accused, Shofunde asked: “Am I correct to say that the event leading to this charge took place between December 2014 and March 2015?”
The witness responded: “No, it commenced from November 2014 to March 2015; Shofunde then suggested: “I put it to you that at no time did the defendant admit to you that he collected the sum of N450million,”
The witness replied that the accused admitted appending his signature on the receipt of payment, and also faulted an insinuation by defence counsel that the accused did not admit making disbursement of the funds.
He said: “That is not correct”. On whether he confronted the accused with exhibit seven, which represents a list produced by Belgore on cash disbursement, the witness replied: “I did not”
Shofunde again said: “I put it to you that the case of the first defendant has always been that he signed exhibit one which is the receipt of payment “; the witness replied “Yes”
Defence counsel again asked: “throughout your investigations, where you set out to find things incriminating the first defendant,”?; The witness replied “Yes”
Shofunde then suggested: “So, then, if the first defendant had told you things that were true, you would have disabused your mind since your purpose was to find things to incriminate him, “; Zakari silently replied No.
At this point, the prosecutor, Oyedepo, then raised objection to the question of defence counsel, citing the provisions of sections 232 of the evidence Act.
Section 232 of the Act provides that “The statements of a defendant can be used to cross examine him without it been shown him,  but, if it’s intent is to contradict the defendant, then his attention must be drawn to same.”
He then insisted that the statements of the first accused ought to be shown to him.
Oyedepo’s submission was however, opposed by Shofunde who argued that the first leg of section 232 allows him to first cross examine the witness without showing him the statement, adding that his job is simply to first impeach the credit of the witness.
In response Oyedepo cited the biblical provisions of the book of Prophet Jeremiah chapter 17 verse 9 saying :
”My lord but even the Bible says that the heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it” so I cannot know the intention of my leaned friend,”
In response, the judge, Justice Mohammed Aikawa replied : “Rotimi God has given us all our free will but that does not mean he does not know every hidden thing, of course God knows everything,”
The court however, overruled his objection and urges the defence to proceed with the cross examination.
Shofunde chronicled his next question thus:
“I put it to you that the case of the first defendant is that on the evening of March 27, 2015, a stakeholders meeting was held in which representatives were selected to proceed the following day and collect the money,”
The witness replied Yes.Meanwhile, during a re-examination by the prosecution, the witness told the court that he had not confronted the accused with exhibit 7, because the accused implored the commission for time to check his records, with a promise to come along with the required document.
After the re-examination, Oyedepo informed the court that he intends to close the prosecution’s case after the second witness but added that the prosecution will amend it’s charges in line with exhibit 7.
Consequently, the court vacated the November14 earlier date and adjourned the case until November 24 for continuation of trial.
In the amended charge, Diezani was alleged to have conspired with Belgore and Sulaiman on or about March 27, 2015, to directly take possession of the sum of N450 million, which they reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of unlawful act.
The trio were also alleged to have taken the said funds in cash, which exceeded the amount authorized by law, without going through the financial institutions.
Belgore and Sulaiman were also alleged to have paid the sum of N50 million to one, Sheriff Shagaya, without going through any financial institution.
The offences are said to have contravened the provisions of  Sections 15(2)(d), 1(a), 16(d) and 18 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 2012.