Bello trial: No law breached in fund withdrawals by state — EFCC witnesses

From Godwin Tsa, Abuja

A prosecution witness in the alleged money laundering trial of former Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, has reaffirmed that fund withdrawals by the state government did not breach any banking law.

Msheila Arhyle Bata, a fourth prosecution witness (PW4) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), further stated that the name of the former governor did not appear as a beneficiary in the account presented as evidence.

Bata, a compliance officer with Zenith Bank, stated this while under cross-examination before Justice Emeka Nwite of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court.

His cross-examiner and lead counsel to the former governor, Joseph Daudu, SAN, had drawn the witness’s attention to certain withdrawals by one Umar Comfort Olufunke, which the prosecution did not mention.

The prosecution had relied heavily on withdrawals by Abdulsalam Hudu, the Cashier of Kogi State Government House.

The withdrawals, in multiples of N10 million, were between December 2017 and April 2018, with beneficiaries being various hotels in Kogi State, according to the witness.

However, on cross-examination, the PW4 also confirmed withdrawals by one Alhassan Omakoji between November 2021 and December 2022, which did not exceed N10 million per withdrawal.

He said the withdrawals were in line with the limits set by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

Bata admitted that he was not aware of any law that regulates how the Kogi State Government spends its money or allocation.

He said apart from the beneficiaries, like the hotels, there was no way he could know what the state’s transactions were meant for.

The prosecution counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, thereafter said he had no re-examination for Msheila and asked for him to be discharged.

The witness had, at the last hearing, confirmed that the former governor was neither a signatory to nor connected with any of the accounts presented as evidence.

He admitted that, going through Exhibit 22A, from pages 24 to 413, Yahaya Bello was not listed on any of the documents as a beneficiary of any transaction.

After Msheila, the fifth prosecution witness (PW5), Jesutoni Akoni, a Compliance Officer with Ecobank Plc, was examined by another prosecution counsel, Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN.

He tendered a subpoena written to Ecobank, which was admitted in evidence.

The EFCC lawyer also sought to tender a statement of account of Moses Ailetu’s companies with a certificate of identification, from 1 January to 31 January 2016.

The defence counsel did not oppose it, and it was admitted as Exhibit 29.

The witness was told to identify the different columns in the statement, which he did.

He was told to confirm cash deposits by the company, which were between N3 million and N20 million and totalling N57 million.

On cross-examination, the witness confirmed that former governor Bello was not the beneficiary of the said deposits.

“Confirm that any of the deposits you identified carries the name of Yahaya Bello,” Daudu said.

“None of them carries the name Yahaya Bello,” the fifth witness responded.

Akoni also admitted that it was not possible to discern the source of funds from the face of the documents.

The prosecution, thereafter, introduced its sixth witness (PW6), Mohammed Hassan, a subpoenaed witness from Keystone Bank.

Hassan, a relationship officer with the bank, was asked to produce the statements of account of Dantata and Sawoe, which were tendered as exhibits, along with the certificate of identification. The defence counsel did not object.

After this, a seventh witness, Olomotame Egoro (PW7), a Compliance Officer, on subpoena from Access Bank, was led in evidence by Pinheiro.

He confirmed to the court that he had the 12 sets of documents that had been requested.

“We supplied sufficient customers’ details that were extracted from the account opening packages at the time the customer opened the account,” he said.

The defence counsel did not object to the admission of the account statement proper but kicked against some extractions.

“I am not going to object to the account proper, but I will object to all 12 purported extractions from the account opening documents attached. But I will not object to the statements of account, which were subpoenaed,” he stated.

“Based on our request, he brought other documents, believing that we may be in need. We did not actually request those documents,” Pinheiro responded.

Daudu prayed the court to tell the prosecution to remove “all the extraneous documents attached.”

The prosecution team then began to detach the documents that were regarded as irrelevant.

Meanwhile, Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the matter to 11 November 2025, for continuation of trial.