Dauda Sulaiman, the second defendant in the ongoing trial of the Chief of Staff to Ahmed Usman Ododo, Ali Bello, on Wednesday, February 18, 2026, told Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja, that the seven statements he made while in the custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, were given voluntarily and endorsed by his counsel, Z.E. Abbas.
The EFCC is prosecuting Ali Bello and Sulaiman on an amended 16-count charge bordering on alleged misappropriation and money laundering to the tune of ₦10,270,556,800.00.
The development occurred during a trial-within-trial instituted to determine the voluntariness of the extra-judicial statements made by the defendants, following their claim that the statements were obtained under duress.
Under cross-examination by the prosecution counsel, Director of Public Prosecution, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, Sulaiman was asked to read out the endorsement made by his lawyer on the statements and to state how many times it appeared.
He responded, “Seven times, my lord.”
Reading from the statements, he said: “This statement was taken voluntarily in my presence,” and confirmed that the endorsement was signed by Z.E. Abbas on all seven occasions.
Questioned Further, Sulaiman affirmed that Abbas also appeared in court as his counsel in respect of the case.
In another portion of his statement, the defendant read aloud: “You are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so. Whatever you say shall be put down in writing and may be given as evidence.”
When asked whether the signature appended to the statement was his, he answered in the affirmative.
In a section of his statement where he discussed how funds were allegedly shared, though he claimed he could no longer remember certain details, Sulaiman denied being forced to make the disclosure, stating, “I was not forced to remember.”
He was also shown Exhibits TWT A and TWT B— alleged certified true copies of proceedings from the Kogi State High Court, Lokoja, which ordered the release of the first defendant. When asked whether he was aware that the matter is pending before the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, challenging the High Court’s decision, Sulaiman responded in the negative.
Earlier, counsel to the first defendant, E.A. Osayomi, informed the court that the defence would not call oral evidence but would instead tender the proceedings of the Kogi State High Court in Suit No. ACL/097/2022: Ali Bello v. Chairman, EFCC, dated December 12, 2022, as well as Motion No. 696/2022.
Although the second defendant’s counsel did not oppose the admissibility of the documents, Oyedepo objected on the ground that the documents were not originals and failed to comply with Section 84(2) of the Evidence Act.
According to him, the documents were scanned and printed without laying the necessary foundation for admissibility.
He further argued that the accompanying receipt was generated at 8:46 a.m. on the day of the proceedings and could not have originated from Lokoja before the court session commenced.
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho held that the documents were relevant and admitted them in evidence, marking them as Exhibits TWT DW-A and TWT DW-B.
Following the ruling, Osayomi informed the court that the first defendant had closed his case.
Counsel to the second defendant, Olusegun Jolaawo, SAN, thereafter opened the defence and called Sulaiman to testify regarding his earlier claim that his statements were obtained under duress.
Testifying under affirmation, Sulaiman alleged that when he visited the EFCC office to deliver food and blood pressure medication to the first defendant, he was confronted with a hard-cover book and questioned about transactions contained therein.
There was no re-examination. Counsel to the first defendant subsequently requested 48 hours to file their written address.
Justice Omotosho adjourned the matter until February 24, 2026, for adoption of written addresses on the no-case submission in the trial-within-trial.