Abuja, March 4, 2026 – Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court sitting in Maitama, Abuja, on Tuesday, March 3, 2026, adjourned proceedings in the ongoing money laundering trial of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Adoza Bello to March 9, 2026, for a ruling on the admissibility of a Deed of Assignment and an Irrevocable Power of Attorney tendered by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The adjournment followed lengthy oral arguments from prosecution and defense counsel regarding the two documents linked to the alleged purchase of Plot 1160, Cadastral Zone C03, Gwarimpa II District, Abuja, for ₦100 million. Bello is facing a 19-count amended charge alleging money laundering involving ₦80,246,470,088.88 purportedly diverted from Kogi State government and local government accounts during his tenure from 2016 to 2024. He has pleaded not guilty to all counts.
The dispute emerged when prosecution counsel Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN, sought to tender the documents through the 10th prosecution witness (PW10), Mahmoud Abdulaziz, Chief Accountant of Dantata & Sawoe Construction Limited. Abdulaziz testified that his company sold the 8,240.72-square-meter property to Azba Real Estate Limited for ₦100 million in February 2021. Payments were made in tranches via electronic transfers to the company's Keystone Bank account: ₦70 million on February 17, ₦10 million on February 19, and ₦20 million on February 22. He identified Maigari Murtala as the transferor.
The witness further stated that the Deed of Assignment was executed between Dantata & Sawoe Construction Limited (signed by Mubarak Dantata and Nasiru Dantata) and Azba Real Estate Limited (signed by Ali Bello). An Irrevocable Power of Attorney was also executed between Mubarak Dantata and Ali Bello. Abdulaziz confirmed that both documents were submitted to the EFCC during its investigation.
Defense counsel J.B. Daudu, SAN, objected strenuously on three grounds. He argued that the documents—being registrable instruments affecting land title—required registration at the appropriate land registry. Only Certified True Copies (CTCs) from the registry would be admissible, he submitted. Daudu contended that the EFCC was not the custodian of land documents, and certification by an EFCC official violated Section 114 of the Evidence Act, 2011. "On these three grounds, my lord, these documents are inadmissible," he maintained.
Responding, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN (leading the prosecution team), described the objection as a "misconception of the law." He emphasized that the witness had already provided unambiguous oral evidence of the transaction and receipt of funds, with the documents tendered solely to corroborate that testimony. Pinheiro stressed that the case was a criminal prosecution for money laundering, not a civil dispute over land title. "This court does not have jurisdiction to determine title to land," he argued, noting the proceedings concerned the flow of funds and financial crimes.
He further submitted that a document inadmissible for one purpose may be admissible for another, and that private documents submitted to a public officer (such as during EFCC investigation) become public documents capable of certification. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Audu v. FRN (2025) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1984) 61, Pinheiro asserted that the apex court had resolved the issue in favor of admissibility in similar circumstances.
In reply on points of law, Daudu insisted no specific purpose beyond juxtaposing names had been articulated for tendering the documents. He argued that even if treated as receipts, they required a valid consideration clause to be admissible. Pinheiro countered that the Deed of Assignment explicitly contained a consideration clause and renewed his call for admission.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Nwite reserved ruling and adjourned to March 9, 2026, for the decision on admissibility and continuation of trial.
Earlier in the session, the defense informed the court of a pending application to vacate an earlier order permitting Bello to travel abroad for lesser Hajj. Daudu noted ongoing discussions between parties and requested time until March 9 to report whether the application remained necessary. Pinheiro confirmed the talks, stating the prosecution would respond to issues including a Red Notice, and noted that "all the airports in the Middle East are closed," potentially affecting travel plans. The judge acknowledged the update without further order.
The proceedings also featured continued cross-examination of earlier witnesses. PW8, an FCMB official, confirmed Exhibit 37 as the statement of account for Kunfayakun Global Limited from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2024. He admitted inflows including ₦100 million from Keyless Nature Limited on December 15 (purpose unknown), ₦400 million RTGS on December 17, 2021, and ₦600 million from Ejadams on February 18, 2022, but stated he was not the account officer and lacked knowledge of underlying business relationships. The witness was discharged.
PW9, Oluwafemi Victoria, a compliance officer with Polaris Bank (testifying under subpoena), had Exhibits 38 (subpoena), 39 (statements of account), and 40 (certificate of identification) admitted. She confirmed multiple ₦10 million inflows into JIT Limited’s account on November 23 and 24, 2021, from Musa Nura, Yusuf Mubarak, and Maishanu Global Industry, totaling ₦150 million. For SSP Foods Limited’s account, she identified 10 credit entries on November 24, 2021—including ₦70 million from Inganchi Synergy and ₦70 million from Murtala Maigari—totaling ₦250 million. Under cross-examination, she confirmed she was not the account officer and had no direct knowledge of transaction purposes or relationships. She was also discharged.
The trial, which has featured multiple adjournments and witness testimonies on bank records, property transactions, and fund flows, remains a significant test of the EFCC's evidence in high-profile corruption cases involving former public officials. Bello's defense has consistently challenged links between transactions and the defendant, while the prosecution seeks to establish patterns of alleged laundering.
The matter continues on March 9, 2026, when the court will deliver its ruling on the contested documents and proceed with further evidence if admitted.
