Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos Special Offences Court on Friday, June 26, 2026, adjourned till July 9, 2026, for a ruling on the admissibility of extra-judicial statements in the alleged $4.5 billion fraud trial of ex-CBN Governor Godwin Emefiele and Henry Omoile.
Emefiele faces a 19-count EFCC charge bordering on gratification and corrupt demands as CBN governor, while Omoile faces three counts of unlawful acceptance of gifts.
Both defendants have pleaded “not guilty” to the charges.
At the resumed hearing on Friday, counsel to the first defendant, Olalekan Ojo, SAN, objected to the admissibility of the extra-judicial statements the prosecution sought to tender, contending that they were not made voluntarily.
Ojo argued that the statements were obtained through oppression as well as physical and mental torture, while his client was allegedly held in the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, for over 157 days.
Relying on the provisions of Section 4 of the Anti-Torture Act, 2017, and relevant sections of the Evidence Act, he submitted that the statements were involuntary and, therefore, inadmissible in evidence.
“The issue before this Honourable Court is whether the statements credited to the first defendant were made voluntarily,” he argued.
According to him, where the voluntariness of a statement is challenged, a video recording of the interrogation remains the most reliable means of establishing compliance with due process.
He contended that the absence of any such recording rendered the statements unreliable.
Ojo further argued that the prosecution failed to produce independent evidence to support the alleged confessional statements and also questioned the role of the lawyer said to have witnessed the interviews.
He urged the court to reject the statements, submitting that any doubt regarding their voluntariness ought to be resolved in favour of the defendant.
In response, the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, who appeared with Bilikisu Buhari and C. C. Okezie, called the prosecution’s eighth witness, Alvan Gurumnaan, an investigator with the EFCC.
Led in evidence, the witness told the court that Emefiele was invited for questioning and that all the interviews were conducted in the presence of his legal representative.
He further informed the court that the prosecution had voluntarily withdrawn the statement dated October 26, 2023, but sought to tender statements made on October 27, October 30, November 1 and November 2, 2023, as exhibits.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, thereafter, argued that there was no basis for conducting a trial-within-trial, maintaining that none of the remaining statements constituted 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 further 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 expeditiously.
Earlier in the proceedings, counsel to the second defendant, Adeyinka Kotoye, SAN, informed the court of a pending application seeking leave to appeal an earlier ruling of the court.
The prosecution indicated that it had no objection to the application, following which Justice Oshodi granted the request.
“I hereby grant the second defendant leave to appeal the ruling of the court,” the judge held.
Justice Oshodi, thereafter, adjourned the matter till July 9, 2026, for a ruling on the admissibility of the extra-judicial 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.
