The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, fixed March 9, 2026, for ruling on the admissibility of a document sought to be presented by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, in the ongoing alleged money laundering trial of the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello.
Justice Emeka Nwite fixed the date for ruling after listening to the arguments of the prosecution and defence counsels on the admissibility or otherwise of the property-related document, which Yahaya Bello’s counsel argued was not before the court during the examination-in-chief of the 10th witness, Mahmoud Abdulazeez.
The documents are the title deed and irrevocable power of attorney in respect of a property in Gwarinpa District of Abuja allegedly sold by Dantata and Sawoe Construction Company to Azba Real Estate Limited at N100 million.
The title deed and the irrevocable power of attorney were said to have been endorsed by Mubarak Dantata on behalf of the construction company, and one Ali Bello on behalf of the Azba Real Estate Limited.
Dispute arose when counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN, sought to tender the two documents through Abdulazeez and was vehemently opposed by Joseph Daudu, SAN, lead counsel to the former governor.
Among others, Daudu argued that the documents were not admissible having not been certified by the appropriate authority.
Daudu argued that being documents on landed property, they ought to be registered under land law before they could have probate value of being admitted.
Although the two documents carried the certification of the EFCC, Daudu maintained that the agency lacked the power to do what it did, adding that Abuja Geographical Information Service, AGIS, is the only body vested with the power of registering and certifying such documents.
Following the hot argument that followed, Kemi Pinheiro, the lead counsel to EFCC took over from Enebeli and urged the court to admit the documents for the purpose of establishing the transactions between Dantata and Sawoe and Azba Real Estate limited.
After taking arguments, Justice Nwite fixed March 9 for his decision to be made known.
Earlier, the eighth prosecution witness, Gabriel Ochoche, while being cross-examined by the defendant’s counsel, Daudu, had said he could not link the name of the former governor to any of the transactions before the court.
The witness also admitted that he did not have any direct inter-personal relationship with the signatories to the account of one Kumfayakum Global Limited, which was presented as exhibit.
This was after he was told to confirm the account opening package and statement of account of the company, covering January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2024, and whether Yahaya Bello’s name featured in the entire documents of the transactions.
Ochoche, a compliance officer with FCMB admitted that, from the face of the document, he could not tell what a particular inflow of N100 million from Keyless Nature Limited, on December 15, 2021, was meant for.
The prosecution witness,
who said he had worked with FCMB for four years, with seven years’ experience in the banking sector, also noted that he was not the account manager for the company’s account.
“Do you know the business relationship between Keyless Nature Limited and Kumfayakum Global Limited?” the defendant’s counsel asked.
“No, I do not,” the witness responded.
The witness said the same thing of a Real Time Gross Settlement inflow from Access Bank, on December 17, 2021, by the order of Keyless Nature Limited.
He admitted that it was only the account holders who would know why the funds were paid and received.
The witness was thereafter asked to identify former Governor Yahaya Bello.
“Please look at the defendant. Do you know him?” the counsel asked.
“Yes, I know him as the former governor of Kogi State,” Ochoche responded.
“In all the inflows and outflows drawn to your attention by learned senior counsel for the prosecution, did the name Yahaya Bello appear anywhere in Exhibit 37?” Daudu, asked.
“It did not appear in any of the transactions drawn to my attention,” the witness said.
He also admitted that apart from the said transactions, Yahaya Bello’s name did not appear anywhere at all in Exhibit 37.
After the ninth prosecution witness, Oluwafemi Victoria, a Compliance Officer with Polaris Bank, testified with respect to transactions conducted on the accounts under investigation, the prosecution counsel called its 10th witness, Mahmoud Abdulazeez.
During the examination-in-chief of the witness, Abdulazeez, a staff of Dantata & Sawoe Construction Company, informed the court that he had been with the firm since 2016 and currently serves as the Chief Accountant and Head of the Accounts Department.
When asked to give evidence on a property located at Plot 1160, Cadastral Zone C03, Gwarinpa II District, Abuja, he testified that a Deed of Assignment was executed between Mubarak Dantata on behalf of Dantata & Sawoe Construction Company and Ali Bello on behalf of Azba Real Estate Limited.
The prosecution then sought to link Maigari Murtala, who allegedly effected payments for the said property with the parties to the Deed of Assignment.
The defence counsel, however, objected, arguing that the Deed of Assignment was not before the court and that any question relating to its contents would be improper in its absence.
He contended that the prosecution’s line of questioning revolved around an unseen document not yet tendered in evidence.
The prosecution then sought to tender certain documents which the witness stated had been submitted to the EFCC during investigation but the Defence counsel objected.
He argued that the documents, being the Deed of Assignment and the Irrevocable Power of Attorney, were registrable instruments relating to the title of land and, having not been shown to be registered, were inadmissible in both civil and criminal proceedings.
In response, prosecution counsel argued that the witness had already led oral evidence of the transaction and receipt of funds, and that the documents were being tendered to anchor that oral testimony, not to prove title to land.
However, the defence counsel, Daudu, maintained that the documents lacked a consideration clause evidencing the transaction and were therefore inadmissible.
Justice Nwite thereafter adjourned sitting to March 9, 2026, for ruling on the admissibility of the documents and continuation of trial.