N450m Scam: Court Admits List Of Beneficiaries Of Alison-Madueke’s $115, 010,000

N450m Scam: Court Admits List Of Beneficiaries Of Alison-Madueke’s $115, 010,000

Justice Aikawa, while dismissing the objection raised on the admissibility of the documents by counsel to the former Minister of National Planning, Professor Abubakar Sulaiman, Ayanlaja (SAN), held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had complied substantially with the provisions of section 84 of the Evidence Act.

The judge also held that the fact that the document was produced by a computer through an email address of a staff in the course of carrying out an official assignment does not in any way invalidate the tendering of the list of beneficiaries before the court.

The court is trying a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Chieftain, Dele Belgore (SAN), who contested the governorship election in Kwara State in 2015 and the former Minister, who served during President Goodluck Jonathan’s Administration on a five count charge of conspiracy and money laundering.

The EFCC had alleged in charges that Allison-Madueke conspired with Belgore and Sulaiman on or about March 27, 2015, to directly take possession of the sum of N450 million, which they reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of unlawful act.

The trio were also alleged to have taken the said funds in cash, which exceeded the amount authorized by law, without going through the financial institutions.

Belgore and Sulaiman were also alleged to have paid the sum of N50 million to one Sheriff Shagaya, without going through the banks.

The offences according to the prosecutor, Mr. Oyedepo, are contrary to Sections 18(a)15(2)(d),1(a), 16(d) and punishable under sections 15(3) and 4, 16 (2)(b), and 16(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 2012.

Both Belgoreand Sulaiman once again pleaded not guilty to the charge.

However at the last sitting of the court Ayanlaja had insisted that the list sought to be tendered by the anti-graft agency emanated from the mail box of the maker.

He cited Section 84 of the Evidence Act, which according to the SAN, governs documented evidence printed out from the computers.

But in his ruling, Justice Aikawa held that, “What the Evidence Act intends to do is to simplify and not to complicate the process of admitting documents in court.

” Any officer of the financial institution is competent to tender the document even if he is not the maker of the said document.

“The document and its attachment are one and same is admissible and can be tendered by the PW1.”

After the document was admitted, Belgore’s counsel, Ebun Shofunde (SAN) commenced the cross-examination of the first prosecution witness, Timothy Olaobaju who confirmed before the court that he volunteered a statement to the EFCC on January 9, 2017.

The witness also stated that he did not mention Alison-Madueke in his statement to the anti-graft agency.

But as Olaobaju was about to give further explanations as to why Alison-Madueke’s name was not mentioned in his statement, when the defence lawyers interjected, insisting that the further explanation was not needed.

Shofunde then urged the court to adjourn the matter to enable the prosecution produce the said statement made by the witness.

Consequently, the judge adjourned until May 2, 2017 for the EFCC to make available the said statement.