The Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, has fixed September 15, 2025, to rule on an application by a former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, seeking a forensic examination of some WhatsApp messages admitted in evidence in his ongoing trial for an alleged $4.5 billion and ₦2.8 billion fraud.
Emefiele is standing trial alongside his co-defendant, Henry Omoile, on a 19-count charge bordering on conspiracy, money laundering, and fraud, brought against them by the EFCC.
Justice Rahman Oshodi fixed the date after listening to arguments from Emefiele’s counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), challenging the authenticity of the digital messages presented by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against him.
Through the lawyer, the former CBN boss told the court that he would need to engage a forensic expert to confirm the veracity of the evidence.
The defendant asked the court to permit the forensic expert to examine both the mobile device identified as an “iPhone 2” used to extract the messages, as well as the printed chat logs.
The senior lawyer argued that the forensic analysis was necessary to verify the credibility of the evidence, which played a critical role in the case being prosecuted by the EFCC.
He said, “My Lord, we are requesting permission to conduct a forensic analysis of the mobile device and the messages extracted therefrom in order to verify their authenticity and integrity.
“It is a critical element of our defence,” Ojo submitted.
In opposing the application, the EFCC counsel, Chinenye Okezie, told the court that the defendant had failed to meet the procedural requirements for such an application.
Okezie also submitted that once such an exhibit has been admitted into evidence, the court assumed custody of the item and it must remain intact until the conclusion of the trial.
She stressed that the defence had not provided adequate details about the forensic process, including the name of the lab, the qualifications or experience of the personnel to conduct the analysis, or the expected duration of the examination.
“The defendants have not offered any options of accredited forensic labs for the court to consider,” Okezie noted.
“We urge the court to direct the Director of the Forensic Department of the Commission to nominate a certified forensic laboratory if the application is to be granted,” Okezie added.
She also stated that there must be a proper chain of custody to ensure the device isn’t tampered with and it is returned to the court upon conclusion of the exercise.
“Any examination should be conducted in the presence of a qualified expert to be nominated by the prosecution. This is to prevent any tampering and to guarantee the integrity of the process,” Okezie added.
After listening to both sides, Justice Oshodi adjourned his ruling on the issue till September 15 after the courts’ annual vacation.
