$4.5bn, N2.8bn fraud trial: Emefiele challenges EFCC’s bid to tender statements, alleges torture

Former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, on Friday challenged the attempt by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to tender a bundle of statements allegedly made by him in his ongoing trial over an alleged $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion fraud and abuse of office case.

Appearing before Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court, Ikeja, Emefiele, through his lead counsel, Mr Olalekan Ojo (SAN), argued that the statements were obtained under oppressive, dehumanising and torturous conditions while he was in EFCC custody.

The defence urged the court to reject the statements, insisting they were not voluntarily made and therefore inadmissible under the law.

According to Ojo, Emefiele was allegedly held incommunicado for more than 157 days before the statements were obtained.

“The objection is predicated on the provisions of the Evidence Act and the Anti-Torture Act,” Ojo told the court.

He argued that Section 4 of the Anti-Torture Act prohibits the admission of confessions or statements obtained through torture, coercion, or other inhumane treatment.

According to the senior advocate, the statements were allegedly extracted after prolonged detention, designed to compel the former CBN governor to make admissions against his will.

He further submitted that the burden rests on the prosecution to establish that any statement sought to be tendered was made voluntarily and without oppression.

“It is a fundamental requirement that any statement sought to be admitted in evidence must have been made voluntarily and not under oppression,” Ojo argued.

The dispute arose after the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), attempted to tender the statements through the prosecution witness, Mr Alvan Ikoku.

During his testimony, Ikoku told the court that the EFCC invited Emefiele for questioning and recorded statements from him on several dates, including October 26 and 27, 2023.

Following the testimony, the defence requested that the court conduct a trial-within-trial to determine whether the statements were voluntarily made before ruling on their admissibility.

Responding, Oyedepo informed the court that the prosecution was willing to withdraw the statement dated October 26, 2023, explaining that it contained only Emefiele’s personal identification details.

As the defence raised no objection, Justice Oshodi struck out the statement from the proceedings.

However, the prosecution opposed the request for a trial-within-trial on the remaining statements, arguing that they were not confessional in nature and therefore did not require such proceedings.

Oyedepo also maintained that the Evidence Act, being the principal legislation regulating the admissibility of evidence, should take precedence over the Anti-Torture Act on procedural issues.

“The statements are not confessional. Therefore, there is no basis for a trial-within-trial,” he argued, while urging the court to expedite the hearing in view of the significant public interest surrounding the case.

In response, Ojo insisted that the issue of voluntariness must first be determined before the court could admit any of the disputed statements into evidence.

He argued that the prosecution had failed to address the defence’s contention that statements allegedly obtained through torture, oppression or dehumanising treatment are inadmissible.

“The issue of voluntariness can only be resolved through a trial-within-trial. Only after such a mini-trial can the court properly determine whether the statements are admissible,” he submitted.

After listening to arguments from both parties, Justice Oshodi adjourned ruling on the admissibility of the disputed statements until July 9.

The substantive trial was subsequently adjourned to October 6, 7, 8 and 9, with proceedings scheduled to commence at 12 noon on each of the hearing dates.