The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Friday, heard how a former Acting Accountant-General of the Federation, AGF, Mr. Anamekwe Nwabuoku, used four different companies to siphon public funds to the tune of about N1.96billion.

A Director in the Federal Civil Service, Mr. Felix Nweke, made the revelation when he testified as a witness in the amended nine-count money laundering charge the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, preferred against the erstwhile Acting AGF.

Nweke, who mounted the box as the second prosecution witness, PW-2, told the court that in a bid to conceal the fraud, the looted funds were channelled into bank accounts that had one Gideon Joseph as the sole signatory.

Led in evidence by EFCC’s lawyer, Mr. Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, the witness, while tracing the origin of the fraud, told the court that he worked under the defendant while he served as a Deputy Director in the Defence Ministry.

According to the witness who disclosed that he was the Deputy Director in charge of the Ministry’s expenditure, between 2018 and 2020, part of his functions included the preparation of schedule of inflows and outflows that were due to the Army, Navy and the Air Force.

Nweke said in 2018 when the ex-Acting AGF was posted to the Ministry, he (Nwabuoku) told him that there was the need to make funds available to facilitate some critical stakeholders, the National Assembly and the Federal Ministry of Finance.

He said the defendant, who insisted that they must be creative, suggested that they should get some companies they could use to pull out funds.

He said it was at that point that they contacted Mr. Joseph who was always coming to the ministry with his brother to make supplies.

Continuing, the PW-2, said though Joseph was initially begging him for contracts, he was persuaded to shelve the idea as the issue of contract award was not within his purview.

He told the court that when he informed the defendant about Joseph, he advised that they could enlist him.

“I then took Gideon to Eucharia Ezeodi, who has been coming to the Ministry for business. I also assisted him to open account with Zenith Bank.”

The PW-2 said their contact in the bank assisted them to open four accounts with Joseph as the signatory.

He said they usually raise money either in naira or foreign currencies, adding that the money would then be handed over to the defendant, either directly or through a proxy.

“Sometimes, the director will also ask me to do some transfers to private persons.”

Nweke added that some of the funds they generated were often used to take care of welfare packages for the military since there was no provision for such.

When EFCC’s lawyer asked the witness how funds were paid into the accounts, he said “from the internal security operations account of the military.”

When he was asked who paid the money into the internal security operations account, the witness said, “it is from the ministry’s account that payments were made.”

The witness mentioned about five names from the bank documents who were workers in the Ministry of Defence.

He alleged that funds were also transferred into bank accounts of staff members and withdrawals made afterwards and paid back into accounts of the four companies.

Earlier in her testimony, an official of Zenith Bank Plc, Eucharia Ezeodi, admitted that she knew the defendant while he was a Director in the Federal Ministry of Defence.

The witness told the court that sometime in 2019, she met the defendant who was a Director of Finance and Account at the Federal Ministry of Defence, through the first witness.

She said the EFCC invited her in 2022 in respect of corporate accounts opened for the four companies that were allegedly used by the defendant to move funds out of the coffers of the ministry.

The banker went ahead to list the said companies as: Temeeo Synergy Concept Limited, Turge Global Investment Limited, Laptev Bridge Limited and Arafura Transnational Afro Limited.

She confirmed that accounts of the companies had Mr. Joseph as the sole signatory.

The witness identified bank documents, including statements of account for the four companies, account opening packages, the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC)’s documents and also her signature on the documents.

While being cross-examined by counsel to the defendant, Mr. Isidore Udenko, the witness said she had no personal relationship with the ex-AGF, except on bank transactions.

When she was asked if the defendant’s name reflected in any of the transactions, the witness replied that a director must not necessarily be a signatory to a company’s account.

She, however, said that a signatory to an account must bring his Identity Card, a Bank Verification Number (BVN), passport photograph, among others, which she said Joseph did.

Ezeodi said the nature of transactions in the account statements was simply deposit and withdrawal, adding that Joseph did all the withdrawals, although the defendant was the alleged beneficiary.

Justice James Omotosho adjourned further hearing in the matter till February 26 and March 5.

It will be recalled that Nwabuoku was in May 2022, appointed to temporarily take charge of the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation (OAGF), after the then AGF, Ahmed Idris, was suspended from office and eventually placed on trial for allegedly laundering public funds totalling about N80.2billion.

EFCC later maintained that the Acting AGF, Nwabuoku, had before his appointment, also dipped his hands into the till.

Investigations into the allegation led to his removal from the office in July 2022, few weeks after he was appointed.

Though Nweke was initially listed as the 2nd defendant, his name was subsequently removed after he agreed to testify against the former Acting AGF.

In the amended charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/240/24, the EFCC alleged that Nwabuoku committed an offence that was contrary to Section 18 of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011, as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012, and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.

The desperate attempt to remove the embattled Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Chairman, Mr. Danladi Umar, has taken a controversial turn, raising serious questions about procedural irregularities and constitutional breaches.

Following previous missteps, including the premature announcement of a new CCT Chairman by former Presidential Spokesperson Ajuri Ngelale and the National Assembly’s failure to meet the required quorum, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Senator George Akume, has further complicated the situation. He issued two conflicting letters, both backdated to give the appearance of a legitimate transition, but riddled with inconsistencies in dates and serial numbers.

Contradictions in Disengagement and Appointment Letters
Documents obtained by PRNigeria reveal that the letter disengaging Umar from his position as CCT Chairman was dated January 6, 2025, but backdated to take effect from November 26, 2024. However, a separate letter appointing Dr. Mainsara Umar Kogo as the new Chairman was dated January 20, 2025, yet was also backdated to take effect from November 27, 2024—just a day after Umar’s removal.

Most notably, the reference numbers on these documents contradict the chronological sequence of events. The disengagement letter issued to Umar bears the reference number SGF.19/S.24/C.1/T/177, while the appointment letter for Kogo, issued 14 days later, inexplicably carries an earlier reference number: SGF.19/S.24/C.1/T/176. This suggests Kogo’s appointment was documented before Umar’s removal, further exposing irregularities in the process.

Omission of Constitutional Justifications

Another glaring inconsistency is the SGF’s failure to cite the relevant constitutional provisions in Umar’s disengagement letter. The letter merely states:

“I write to inform you that His Excellency, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, President, Federal Republic of Nigeria, in the exercise of his powers, has approved your disengagement as Chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal, with effect from 26th November, 2024, following the resolution of the National Assembly. While conveying Mr. President’s appreciation to you for your services to the nation during your tenure, may I wish you God’s guidance and best of luck in your future endeavors.”

In contrast, Kogo’s appointment letter explicitly references Paragraph 15(3) of the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 20(4) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. This omission raises questions about the legality of Umar’s removal, as the constitutional process for such an action appears to have been ignored.

Legal Violations in Umar’s Removal

Meanwhile, the 1999 Constitution, as amended and cited by SGF, clearly outlines the procedure for appointing and removing a CCT Chairman: Paragraph 15(3) of the Fifth Schedule: “The Chairman and members of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall be appointed by the President in accordance with the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC).”

Paragraph 17(3) of the Fifth Schedule: “A person holding the office of Chairman or member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall not be removed from his office or appointment by the President except upon an address supported by a two-thirds majority of each House of the National Assembly, praying that he be so removed for inability to discharge the functions of the office in question (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body), for misconduct, or for contravention of this Code.”

Paragraph 17(4) of the Fifth Schedule: “A person holding the office of Chairman or member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall not be removed from office before the retiring age except in accordance with the provisions of this Code.”

Despite these constitutional safeguards, there is no evidence that that the National Judicial Council (NJC), chaired by Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, recommended a new CCT Chairman. There is also no evidence that the National Assembly met the two-thirds majority requirement for Umar’s removal.

Moreover, there is no also evidence suggesting that both houses of the National Assembly have met the required quorum or followed the proper procedures for engaging and disengaging a CCT Chairman. This matter is currently before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court before the recent letters.

Interestingly, despite the purported dismissal, Umar has been invited by the police for questioning over allegations of “Obstruction and Conduct Likely to Cause Breach of Peace.”

FG’s Track Record of Blunders on CCT Leadership
This is not the first time the Federal Government has mishandled attempts to remove the CCT Chairman. In 2024, the Senate, led by Senator Godswill Akpabio, attempted to invoke Section 157(1) of the 1999 Constitution to remove Umar, citing allegations of and misconduct. However, a PRNigeria fact-check revealed that Section 157 applies to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), not the CCT, making the move legally untenable.

Additionally, the Senate previously confused the appointment of Abdullahi Usman Bello, who was cleared to chair the CCB, with that of the CCT—another embarrassing legal misstep.

Targeting Umar: Political or Legal?
Curiously, following his contested removal, Umar has now been invited by the police for questioning over allegations of “Obstruction and Conduct Likely to Cause a Breach of Peace.” This development raises concerns that his removal might be politically motivated rather than based on any proven misconduct.

As the controversy unfolds, legal experts and constitutional scholars argue that the Federal Government’s handling of the CCT leadership transition not only violates established legal procedures but also raises serious credibility concerns about the administration’s adherence to the rule of law.

The series of blunders, including backdated letters, contradictory serial numbers, and the omission of constitutional requirements, raises serious doubts about the legality of Danladi Umar’s removal and Mainsara Umar Kogo’s appointment. Without adherence to due process, the Federal Government risks another embarrassing legal defeat, further eroding public trust in its governance.

Credit: PRNigeria

A Bayelsa State High Court sitting in Yenagoa has sentenced the state’s Commissioner of Police to prison for failing to comply with a court order concerning a long-standing land dispute.

The legal battle dates back to a judgment delivered on November 26, 2016, in Suit No. YHC/210/2014, which was later upheld by the Court of Appeal in case CA/PH/170/2018. Despite these rulings, the Commissioner of Police allegedly disregarded the court’s directive, prompting the recent sentencing.

At the heart of the conflict is a parcel of land in Asam, Yenagoa, which currently serves as the operational base for Operation Doo-Akpo, a state-owned security outfit. The courts have ruled in favor of nine families from the Yenizue-gene Community, including the Fabiri, Ayoko, Aku, Ugbon, Obediah, Sampson, and Boye families, affirming their ownership rights.

Despite these judicial decisions, the police have reportedly refused to vacate the land, leading to legal action from the rightful owners.

Speaking at a press briefing, the lead counsel for the claimants, Ukunbiriowei Saiyou, confirmed that Justice R. Ajuwa issued the imprisonment order against the Commissioner of Police on December 27, 2024.

Saiyou explained that the claimants initiated committal proceedings in 2022 due to the Commissioner’s persistent refusal to comply with multiple court rulings.

“The police have failed to appear before the court or challenge the various decisions, leaving us no choice but to seek enforcement,” Saiyou stated.

Following the sentencing, there have been calls for the Inspector General of Police (IGP) to intervene and ensure the enforcement of the judgments, particularly the Court of Appeal ruling from June 10, 2021.

Saiyou warned that if the IGP does not act swiftly, it could result in the arrest of the Bayelsa State Commissioner of Police.

He further revealed that since Saipem vacated the disputed land along Elebele-Opolo Road, the police and Operation Doo-Akpo have been occupying the area illegally, without the consent of the rightful landowners.

Representatives of the affected families, Chief Honest Boye Wilson and Hon. Manager Fabiri, voiced their frustration over the prolonged occupation of their land by the police. Despite their grievances, they reassured the public that they would continue to seek justice through legal means rather than resorting to public demonstrations against the government or security agencies.

“The Bayelsa State High Court ruled in our favor, and the Court of Appeal reaffirmed that ruling. Yet, the police remain on our land unlawfully,” Fabiri emphasized.

As the situation unfolds, all eyes are on law enforcement authorities to see if they will comply with the court orders or face further legal consequences.