Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, on Friday reserved ruling until July 9 on the admissibility of extra-judicial statements allegedly made by former Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, Governor, Godwin Emefiele, in his ongoing $4.5 billion fraud trial.
Emefiele and his co-defendant, Henry Omoile, are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, over allegations of corruption and unlawful receipt of gratification. Mr Emefiele is facing a 19-count charge bordering on receiving gratification and making corrupt demands while serving as CBN Governor, while Omoile is standing trial on a three-count charge of allegedly accepting gifts unlawfully as an agent. Both defendants have pleaded not guilty.
At Friday’s proceedings, counsel to Emefiele, Olalekan Ojo, SAN, objected to the admissibility of statements the prosecution sought to tender, arguing that they were not made voluntarily. He alleged that the statements were obtained through oppression as well as physical and mental torture while his client was held in the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, for more than 157 days. Citing Section 4 of the Anti-Torture Act, 2017, and relevant provisions of the Evidence Act, Ojo argued that the statements were involuntary and therefore inadmissible.
“The issue before this Honourable Court is whether the statements credited to the first defendant were made voluntarily,” he submitted.
The senior advocate argued that “where the voluntariness of a statement is disputed, a video recording of the interrogation is the most reliable means of establishing compliance with due process.” He maintained that the absence of such a recording undermined the credibility of the statements. Ojo further contended that the prosecution failed to produce independent evidence to corroborate the alleged confessional statements and questioned the role of the lawyer who was said to have witnessed the interviews. He urged the court to reject the statements, arguing that “any doubt regarding their voluntariness should be resolved in favour of the defendant.”
Responding, the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, who appeared alongside Bilikisu Buhari and C.C. Okezie, called the prosecution’s eighth witness, EFCC investigator Alvan Gurumnaan.
The witness told the court that Emefiele was invited for questioning and that all interviews were conducted in the presence of his legal representative. He further informed the court that the prosecution had voluntarily withdrawn Emefiele’s statement dated October 26, 2023, but sought to tender statements recorded on October 27, October 30, November 1 and November 2, 2023, as exhibits. “If the defence does not want that statement, we are prepared to withdraw it. We are withdrawing it not because it was obtained through torture or oppression,” the witness said.
Oyedepo argued that there was “no basis for conducting a trial-within-trial because none of the remaining statements amounted to a confession.” “There is nothing in the defendant’s statements that can be construed as an admission of the facts in issue,” he submitted. He also argued that the Anti-Torture Act does not make a trial-within-trial mandatory in the circumstances and urged the court to dismiss the defence’s objection and allow the substantive trial to proceed.
Earlier, counsel to the second defendant, Adeyinka Kotoye, SAN, informed the court of a pending application seeking leave to appeal an earlier ruling. The prosecution did not oppose the application, prompting Justice Oshodi to grant the request. “I hereby grant the second defendant leave to appeal the ruling of the court,” the judge held.
Justice Oshodi subsequently adjourned the matter until July 9, 2026, for a ruling on the admissibility of the disputed statements. The court also fixed October 6, 7 and 8, as well as November 11, 12 and 13, 2026, for the continuation of the substantive trial.