The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has urged the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja to dismiss a no-case submission filed by former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor, Godwin Emefiele, in his alleged $6.23 million fraud trial.
In a statement on Tuesday, the commission said the prosecution’s evidence established a prima facie case requiring him to enter his defence.
Mr Emefiele is facing an amended 20-count charge bordering on alleged criminal breach of trust, forgery, abuse of office, conspiracy, and obtaining money by false pretence.
Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, told Justice Hamza Mu’azu that the prosecution had established a prima facie case requiring Mr Emefiele to enter his defence.
He maintained that requiring Mr Emefiele to defend himself would not amount to compelling him to prove his innocence, but would allow him to respond to the evidence presented by the prosecution.
On the contract-related counts, the prosecution argued that Mr Emefiele used his position as CBN governor to confer undue advantage on companies allegedly associated with his wife, brother-in-law and other associates.
He said the exhibits include the ex-CBN governor’s approval signatures and corporate records allegedly linking him to companies associated with his relatives, including Architekon Nigeria Limited.
Mr Oyedepo said Mr Emefiele used his position as CBN governor to confer undue advantage on companies allegedly associated with his wife, brother-in-law and other associates.
He told the court that contracts valued between $6 million and $10 million allegedly bypassed the CBN’s Major Contracts Tender Board, which he said was responsible for reviewing contracts exceeding $1 million before they were forwarded to the governor for approval.
According to him, contracts exceeding $1 million must be reviewed by the board before recommendations are forwarded to the Governor for approval.
He explained that the board was also responsible for checking whether CBN staff members were directors of companies bidding for contracts.
Mr Oyedepo cited the testimony of a procurement department staff member, identified as PW10, alleging that at least three companies submitted bids for each contract, and officials were instructed to process the bids in favour of a company linked to Mr Emefiele’s associates.
He further alleged that the company was informed of the CBN’s internal prices before submitting bids that matched those prices, thereby denying competing bidders a fair opportunity.
“The ingredient of the offence is the unfairness of the process,” Mr Oyedepo said.
He argued that the execution of the contracts and the absence of evidence directly tracing the proceeds to Mr Emefiele did not negate the allegations of an unfair procurement process.
The prosecution also submitted that the company had existed for years without winning contracts of the kind in question until Mr Emefiele became CBN governor, after which it allegedly received all 45 contracts under consideration.
Mr Oyedepo relied on evidence of transfers from Mr Emefiele’s personal account to the company’s account, arguing that the transactions demonstrated the defendant’s knowledge of the company and its directors.
“The recommendation would never be an approval,” he told the court.
Mr Oyedepo urged the court to distinguish the judicial authority cited by the defence, arguing that the case concerned money laundering and the proof of a predicate offence, whereas the present charges centred on the alleged conferment of corrupt advantage through an unfair procurement process.
On the alleged $6.23 million withdrawal, the prosecution said the CBN released the funds based on letters purportedly from former President Muhammadu Buhari and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha.
He argued that evidence from witnesses, including Mr Mustapha and a forensic analyst, showed the letters used to facilitate the release of the funds were forged.
Mr Oyedepo also relied on PW15’s testimony that an automatic system notification was sent to Mr Emefiele after the relevant account went into debit, but the former CBN governor allegedly failed to act.
The prosecution further alleged that the funds were released to an individual on Mr Emefiele’s instructions, with part of the money allegedly used to renovate one of his properties, while the balance was recovered from the individual.
Addressing the defence’s argument that the prosecution’s case was speculative, Mr Oyedepo said inferences drawn from admissible evidence were distinct from speculation.
He also argued that the absence of a forensic examination of the accused’s signatures did not automatically defeat the forgery allegation, adding that the court could compare disputed signatures in accordance with the law.
The prosecution urged the court to reject the defence’s arguments and require Mr Emefiele to enter his defence.
However, defence counsel Mathew Burkaa urged the court to discharge the former CBN governor, arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish the essential ingredients of the alleged offences.
“My lord, in the entirety of the charge, the prosecution failed to prove that he had conferred undue advantage on his wife and his associates,” Ms Burkaa said.
The court said the date for its ruling on the no-case submission would be communicated to the parties.
We have recently deactivated our website's comment provider in favour of other channels of distribution and commentary. We encourage you to join the conversation on our stories via our Facebook, Twitter and other social media pages.