A NOTABLE exchange occurred at the Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday during the ongoing money laundering trial of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello.
Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, representing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), referred to the case as “a political matter,” sparking a brief debate between legal counsel.
The remark came as arguments arose before Justice Emeka Nwite over whether Joseph Daudu, SAN, the defence counsel, could immediately cross-examine the fourth prosecution witness (PW-4) or wait until Friday.
Pinheiro emphasized the significance of the case, noting that it involved a former state governor and thus carried political weight.
Daudu countered, asserting that the trial strictly concerned allegations of money laundering, not political motives.
However, Pinheiro reiterated his stance, stating that the defendant was not an ordinary individual but a political figure who had once aspired to the presidency.
In response, Justice Nwite humorously remarked, “Political? If that is the case, then those handling political cases should prepare to take over the matter.”
Court Rejects EFCC’s Request to Cross-Examine Its Own Witness
Earlier in the proceedings, Justice Nwite ruled against the EFCC’s application to cross-examine its own witness in the trial. The judge clarified that Nigerian law does not permit the prosecution to re-examine its witness in the manner proposed unless the witness is declared “hostile.”
The issue stemmed from the previous hearing, where Olukayode Enitan, SAN, another EFCC counsel, had sought to cross-examine the third prosecution witness (PW-3), Mr. Nicholas Ojehomon, an internal auditor at the American International School, Abuja (AISA).
The request followed Daudu’s cross-examination of Ojehomon, during which the defence referenced a judgment from the FCT High Court (Exhibit 19).
Enitan argued that he intended to cross-examine the witness based on Exhibit 19 rather than conduct a re-examination. However, Daudu opposed the move, leading to an adjournment for a ruling.
In his decision, Justice Nwite sided with the defence, stating that the prosecution’s argument was “misconceived.” He clarified that while the prosecution could re-examine the witness, it must limit its questions to specific pages (1, 14, and 15) of Exhibit 19.
Fourth Prosecution Witness Testifies on Financial Transactions
Following the ruling, Pinheiro called the fourth prosecution witness (PW-4), Mshelia Arhyel Bata, a compliance officer at Zenith Bank. Bata, appearing under subpoena, confirmed that the bank had provided certified statements of account for the Kogi State Government House Administration and six other entities, which were subsequently admitted as exhibits.
Under examination, Bata explained banking withdrawal limits, noting that before the cashless policy, government withdrawals were capped at N10 million per transaction. The prosecution directed his attention to a May 23, 2016, transaction under the name Abdulsalami Hudu, which involved a N10 million cash withdrawal — consistent with the then-applicable threshold. However, Bata acknowledged that there were nine cash transactions on the same date.
The witness also confirmed multiple credit transactions on January 30, 2018, totalling approximately N1.092 billion.
When asked about withdrawals, Daudu interjected, stating, “He (Pinheiro) knows that they are for security votes.” Bata later aggregated the total withdrawals at N1.968 billion, spread across different dates.
After the prosecution concluded its examination, Justice Nwite adjourned the case to Thursday, June 27 (tomorrow) for cross-examination by the defence.
