The fourth prosecution witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in the alleged money laundering trial of the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, has reaffirmed that the state government’s fund withdrawals did not breach any banking law.
During cross-examination before Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court on Monday, Mshelia Arhyel Bata, a compliance officer with Zenith Bank, also reiterated that the name of the former governor did not appear as a beneficiary in the account presented as evidence.
The Defence Counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, drew the witness’s attention to certain withdrawals made by one Umar Comfort Olufunke, which the prosecution had not mentioned.
The prosecution had concentrated on withdrawals by Abdulsalam Hudu.
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.
During cross-examination, the witness also confirmed withdrawals made by one Alhassan Omakoji between November 2021 and December 2022, which did not exceed N10 million per transaction. He said the withdrawals were in line with the limits set by the Central Bank of Nigeria.
He 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, such as the hotels, there was no way he could know what the state’s transactions were intended for.
The prosecution counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, thereafter stated that he had no re-examination for Mshelia and requested that he 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 Mshelia, the fifth prosecution witness, Jesutoni Akoni, a compliance officer with Ecobank Plc, was examined by another prosecution counsel, Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN.
He tendered a summons letter written to Ecobank, which was admitted in evidence.
The EFCC lawyer also sought to tender a statement of account for Moses Ailetu’s companies, along with a certificate of identification, covering the period from January 1 to January 31, 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.
The company instructed him to confirm cash deposits, which ranged from N3 million to N20 million, 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 SAN said.
“None of them carry 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, whom Keystone Bank subpoenaed.
Mohammed Bello Hassan, a relationship officer with the bank, was asked to produce the statements of account of Dantata and Sawoe, which were tendered as Exhibit, along with the certificate of identification. The defence counsel did not object.
After this, a seventh witness, Olomotame Egoro, a compliance officer, was led in as evidence by Pinheiro SAN, having been subpoenaed by Access Bank.
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 itself, but opposed some extractions.
“I am not going to object to the account proper, but I will object to all the 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 SAN responded.
Daudu SAN prayed that the court instruct the prosecution to remove “all the extraneous documents attached”.
The prosecution team then began to remove the documents that were deemed irrelevant.
At this point, Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the matter to tomorrow, November 11, 2025, for continuation of the trial.
