EFCC investigator denies obtaining statements from Yahaya Bello’s nephew, others under duress

An Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) investigator, on Monday, denied coercing Ali Bello, who is a newphew of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello, and his co-defendant, to write their extrajudicial statement regarding their N10 billion money laundering trial.

The EFCC’s investigator, Ahmed Abubakar, who is the first prosecution witness in the trial-within-trial ordered by trial judge James Omotosho to ascertain the claim of the defendants that their extrajudicial statements were obtained by the EFCC under duress.

The witness was led in evidence by prosecution lawyer Rotimi Oyedepo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mr Bello, who is the incumbent Chief of Staff to Governor Ahmed Ododo, is facing the N10 billion money laundering charges alongside Daudu Sulaiman.

The charges stemmed from Ali’s alleged unlawful activities during the tenure of Governor Bello, who himself is facing two sets of corruption charges in Abuja.

On Monday, Ali and his co-defendant, through their lawyers, Abubakar Aliyu, a SAN, and Olusegun Jolaawo, a SAN, objected opposed Mr Oyedepo’s attempt to tender eight statements credited to them as exhibits.

Mr Oyedepo sought to tender the eight statements as exhibits while Mr Abubakar was testifying in the main trial as the 17th prosecution witness.

Six of the extrajudicial statements were credited to Ali and the remaining two statements were allegedly made by Mr Suleiman.

While Mr Aliyu, who appeared for Ali, insisted that the six statements made by his client were not made voluntarily, Mr Jolaawo, counsel for Mr Sulaiman, the second defendant, equally told the court that his client was threatened by the commission’s operatives who took his client’s two statements.

However, the EFCC’s lawyer disagreed with the defence submissions.

The Chief of Staff to the Kogi State governor was said to have made those statements on 29 and 30 November 2022 as well as 1, 10, 11 and 12 December 2022, while Mr Sulaiman was said to have made his two statements on 30November 2022 and 1 December 2022.

After taking lawyers’ arguments, the trial judge, Mr Omotosho, ordered a trial-within-trial and directed Mr Abubakar, to give evidence as the first prosecution witness in the trial-within-trial.

The witness told the court that a member of his team, Yazid Bawa, and the team leader, Adamu Usman Yusuf, neither threatened the defendants while their statements were taken nor attempted to induce them.

He admitted that Ali was given a cautionary word notice which was signed by the defendant himself before he began to write the statement he made on 29 November 2022.

When Mr Oyedepo asked the witness to read out the cautionary word in the open court, the witness, while reading from the document, said Ali admitted that he was told to consult his lawyer before making the statement but that he chose to write in the absence of his lawyer.

However, defence lawyer, Mr Aliyu, raised an objection against Mr Oyedepo, leading the witness to read from the document but the lawyer later dropped his objection after the judge’s intervention.

When Mr Oyedepo asked the witness if Ali was threatened, he said: “Yazid and Adamu did not threaten the defendant in my presence.”

The witness said the allegations by the second defendant, Mr Sulaiman, that he did not make his statements in accordance with the commission’s prescription under the law and that he was threatened to be forced to sit on an electric chair if he failed to make statements were false.

READ ALSO: Court registrar admits tampering with evidence in Ali Bellos N10bn fraud trial, judge orders probe

“I am hearing this for the first time. We don’t have any electric chair in the EFCC’s office that can electrocute someone.

“And no suspect has ever died of electrocution in the EFCC before,” the witness said.

He also told the court that Mr Sulaiman’s lawyer, Z.E. Abbas, endorsed all the pages of the statement creditted to the defendant, writing, “This statement was taken voluntarily in my presence.”

The defence lawyers later cross-examined the witness and the judge adjourned the matter until Tuesday for continuation of trial-within-trial.

(NAN)