COURT ADMITS EMEFIELE’S EFCC STATEMENTS, REJECTS DEFENCE OBJECTIONS IN ALLEGED $4.5BN FRAUD TRIAL
By Aishat Momoh
Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja on Thursday admitted into evidence extra-judicial statements allegedly made by former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele, to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, dismissing objections raised by the defence in his ongoing alleged $4.5 billion fraud trial.
In a ruling, Justice Oshodi held that Section 4 of the Anti-Torture Act, 2017, relied upon by Emefiele's counsel, did not require the court to conduct a trial-within-trial before admitting the statements.
The judge agreed with the prosecution that a trial-within-trial was unnecessary because none of the statements sought to be tendered constituted a confession.
He held that for an extra-judicial statement to qualify as confessional, it must contain a clear and unequivocal admission of the offences alleged against the maker.
According to the court, nothing contained in Emefiele's statements amounted to an admission of the facts in issue.
Justice Oshodi consequently dismissed the defence's objections and admitted as exhibits statements allegedly made by Emefiele on October 27, October 30, November 11, November 12 and November 13, 2023.
The court thereafter adjourned the matter to October 6, 7 and 8, as well as November 11, 12 and 13, 2026, for the continuation of trial.
Emefiele is standing trial alongside Henry Omoile on a 19-count charge bordering on abuse of office, receiving gratification, accepting gifts through agents, corruption and fraudulent property transactions involving about $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion.
Omoile is also facing a three-count charge of allegedly receiving unlawful gifts in connection with transactions involving the Central Bank of Nigeria.
Both defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charges preferred against them by the EFCC.
At the previous proceedings, Emefiele's lead counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), urged the court to reject the statements, arguing that they were involuntarily obtained through oppression and torture during his client's detention by the Department of State Services for more than 157 days.
Ojo contended that Emefiele was subjected to physical and psychological torture, rendering the statements inadmissible under the Anti-Torture Act, 2017, and relevant provisions of the Evidence Act.
He argued that once the voluntariness of a statement is challenged, the prosecution bears the burden of proving that it was freely made, adding that a video recording of the interrogation would have been the most reliable evidence of compliance with due process.
According to the senior advocate, the absence of any video recording rendered the statements "poisoned fruits."
He further submitted that the prosecution failed to produce independent evidence corroborating the alleged statements and questioned the role of the lawyer said to have witnessed the interviews.
Ojo urged the court to resolve any doubt regarding the voluntariness of the statements in favour of the accused and reject them.
Responding, the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), argued that a trial-within-trial was unnecessary because none of the statements amounted to a confession or contained any admission of the facts in issue.
He maintained that the Anti-Torture Act does not make a trial-within-trial mandatory in such circumstances and urged the court to dismiss the defence's objections and allow the substantive trial to proceed.
Oyedepo further submitted that there was nothing in the statements that could be construed as an admission of the offences alleged against Emefiele, insisting that the prosecution had satisfied the legal requirements for their admissibility.
0 Comments