•Says investigation restricted to Emefiele’s kin, associates
*Didn’t interview spouse, brother-in-law on possession of Archtekon corporations
Alex Enumah in Abuja
Mr Michael Agboro, a prosecution witness within the trial of former Governor of Central Financial institution of Nigeria (CBN), Mr Godwin Emefiele, yesterday, admitted earlier than a Excessive Courtroom of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) that Emefiele didn’t confer any unfair or corrupt benefit on himself within the award of contracts to some firms throughout his tenure on the apex financial institution.
Emefiele is standing trial on a 20-count amended cost most popular towards him by the workplace of the Legal professional Normal of the Federation (AGF). He was alleged to have engaged in felony breach of belief, forgery, conspiracy to acquire by false pretence, and acquiring cash by false pretence, when he served because the apex financial institution’s boss.
Among the many allegations was that the previous CBN governor solid a doc, titled, “Re: Presidential Directive on Overseas Election Observer Missions,” dated January 26, 2023, with Ref No. SGF.43/L.01/201, and purported identical to have emanated from the workplace of the Secretary to the Authorities of the Federation (SGF).
Moreover, Emefiele was accused of utilizing his workplace as CBN governor to confer unfair and corrupt benefit on two firms, April 1616 Nigeria Restricted and Architekon Nigeria Restricted.
At Monday’s proceedings, the federal authorities, in making an attempt to ascertain its cost, referred to as its seventh prosecution witness, Agboro, an investigator with the Unbiased, Corrupt Practices and different associated offences Fee (ICPC).
Agboro, led in proof by Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, tendered a number of paperwork, together with firm registration paperwork and awards in addition to funds for contract referring to the 2 types.
In his proof, the investigator claimed that Emefiele conferred unfair and corrupt benefit within the award of contracts to April 1616 and Archtekon as a result of paperwork along with his staff, comprising individuals drawn from the ICPC, Financial and Monetary Crimes Fee (EFCC), Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), and Division of State Service (DSS), confirmed that whereas a Director of April 1616, Mrs Saadatu Yaro, was a public officer, with the CBN, Emefiele’s spouse, Margaret Omoyile, and his brother-in-law, Mac Congo, have been administrators in Architekon.
Nevertheless, throughout cross examination by Emefiele’s lawyer, Mr Mathew Burkaa, SAN, the witness, when requested whether or not the defendant conferred unfair and corrupt benefit on himself, answered, “He conferred on Saadatu Ramalan Yaro, who’s a public officer working beneath him. He additionally conferred on his spouse and brother-in-law.”
The cross examination, partly, went thus, between Burkaa (Emefiele’s lawyer) and Agboro (prosecution witness):
Query: So he didn’t confer on himself.
Reply: No. We restricted our investigation to him, his spouse, kin and associates.
Moreover, the witness admitted that nowhere of their findings did they uncover that Emefiele was a director or shareholder or an account signatory in both April1616 Restricted or Architekon Nigeria Restricted.
He additionally admitted that there was no proof of any fee made to Emefiele by these firms in the midst of performing his duties on the CBN.
When requested if in the midst of their investigation they interviewed individuals in CBN to find out whether or not the 2 corporations executed the roles they have been contracted to do, the witness mentioned “sure”.
Nevertheless, when requested if the staff of their closing report acknowledged this reality, the witness mentioned he couldn’t recall in the event that they did.
Agboro had earlier admitted that his staff did a report on their investigation, which was forwarded to the DG, DSS, including that he didn’t come to the courtroom with it.
When requested if he was conversant with the process of award of contracts within the CBN, the witness, who replied in affirmation, nevertheless, advised the courtroom, “I can’t keep in mind” whether or not the defendant was a part of the procurement and tender committees that vetted, reviewed and really useful April 1616 and Architekon for the varied tasks they dealt with.
Query: Are you conscious that every one the contracts that shaped the premise of this cost handed by means of the vetting committee?
Reply: I don’t know.
Query: In the middle of your investigation, did you see any doc, which confirmed that the defendant, both by telephone name, e mail or official communication of CBN, made illustration that April 1616 and Architekon must be awarded these contracts?
Reply: No.
Query: In order it pertains to the award of contract to those two firms, you didn’t know if all these processes laid down by the CBN have been adopted?
Reply: You’re appropriate.
In the meantime, the witness admitted that April 1616 went by means of a bidding course of with different firms and received the varied contracts awarded to it.
Agboro additional confirmed that he didn’t go to the contract websites to confirm if the roles awarded to the corporations have been finished.
Query: Because you didn’t go to, you’ll not know if the contract was carried out or not?
Reply: Sure.
When requested if he thought it was flawed for funds to be made to the contractors after jobs had been accomplished, Agboro confirmed that it was not inappropriate to make such funds.
Upon additional cross examination concerning the variety of folks that handled a doc for the ultimate award of contract, the witness confirmed that there have been as much as 10 individuals that minuted on a contract doc; whereas solely the defendant, out of 10, is standing trial.
Query: You’ll agree that of the ten individuals, it is just the defendant that’s standing trial?
Reply: Sure.
On the difficulty of Emefiele’s spouse being a director of Architekon, the witness, who claimed that moreover paperwork obtained from the Company Affairs Fee (CAC), Emefiele himself throughout an interview confirmed that Margaret Omoyile was his spouse, mentioned he couldn’t recall if Emefiele advised him throughout the identical interview that his spouse was not a director of Architekon.
Agboro admitted that his staff didn’t interview Emefiele’s spouse nor his brother-in-law concerning their participation in Architekon.
Query: You believed what the defendant advised you within the interview?
Reply: Sure.
Query: Within the interview, did he not inform you that Margaret is his spouse however that she is just not a director within the firm?
Reply: I can’t keep in mind, until I refresh my reminiscence.
Justice Hamza Muazu adjourned the case until April 25 for additional cross examination of the seventh defendant.
Emefiele, within the amended cost, was alleged to have on February 8, 2023 knowingly obtained, by false pretence, $6,230,000.00 by falsely representing that the Secretary to the Authorities of the Federation vide a letter dated January 26, 2023 with Ref No. SGF 43/L.01/201 requested the CBN to offer a contingent logistic advance within the sum of $6,230,000 “according to Mr. President’s directive.”
