Abimbola Williams, an Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness, said on Thursday that former Governor Yahaya Bello’s name did not appear on the Kogi Government House Bank account.
Williams told Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja during cross-examination by the former governor’s lead counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, during the ongoing money laundering trial.
Williams, the second prosecution witness (PW-2) in the trial, also said that she was not the United Bank for Africa (UBA)’s account officer for the government house account.
Earlier, when the matter was called, the EFCC’s lawyer, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, told the court that their PW-2, Abimbola Williams, who was on the subpoena, was in court to give her evidence.
Williams, a Compliant Officer with UBA, confirmed to the court that a further subpoena was served on the bank.
Justice Emeka Nwite admitted the subpoena in evidence and marked it ‘Exhibit 7’ after Daudu did not oppose Pinhero’s application to tender the document.
According to the prosecution, the subpoena requested the production of Maselina Njoku's statements of account from Jan. 1, 2019, to Dec. 31, 2020.
The witness confirmed that it was the bank's request, adding that a certificate of compliance was also issued.
While being led in evidence by Pinheiro, Williams confirmed 10 withdrawals in favour of Abdulsalam Hudu, in the sum of N10 million each on Dec. 12, 2018.
She said the withdrawals were done with cheques and presented across the counter.
The PW-2, however, confirmed during Daudu's cross-examination that the former Governor’s name did not feature in the opening and management of the said Kogi Government House Bank account.
She also agreed that the account is domiciled in Lokoja, the state capital, not Area 3, Abuja, where she works.
She agreed that as a compliant officer, her duty involves protecting the integrity of the bank from legal penalties, reputational damage, and financial losses.
The witness mentioned the names of the three signatories on the account, including Alhaji Yakubu Ismail, who was said to be a permanent secretary.
“Now, in both the account opening documents and the statements of account from Exhibits ‘E1 to E72,’ does the name ‘Yahaya Bello’ appear anywhere?” the senior lawyer asked Williams.
“No, the name Yahaya Bello does not feature,” the witness responded.
Daudu again asked, “Please look at Exhibits 2P1 to 2P62, does the name ‘Yahaya Bello’ appear anywhere in the document?”
“My Lord, the name Yahaya Bello is not featured on the exhibits,” the witness answered.
Pinheiro, however, moved to re-examine the witness, but Daudu objected.
After a brief argument, Justice Nwite directed Pinhero to go on with the re-examination.
The EFCC’s lawyer then asked the witness if she was familiar with the signature on the document bearing Edward Bananga's name, and she responded in the affirmative.
The PW-2 said she signed the documents on behalf of one Edward Bananga.
Responding, Daudu also applied to cross-examine the witness, but Pinheiro disagreed.
“My Lord, the witness initially disowned the signature, but under re-examination, the prosecution led her to admit it.
“Therefore, I have the right to challenge that admission and prove that her claim regarding the signature is incorrect,” Daudu told the court.
According to him, cross-examination is meant to prove the accuracy or veracity of the witness.
“I am entitled to disprove what she said. This is in the interest of justice,” Daudu added, and the judge allowed his argument.
The defence lawyer then asked the witness to read the document in dispute.
Reading from the document, she said, “I, Edward Bananga, hereby certified and confirmed that……”
Responding, Daudu said: “I put it to you that you are not Edward Bananga.”
“I am not Edward Bananga, my lord,” the witness answered.
The prosecution also called another witness, Nicholas Ohehomon, from the American International School (AIS), as 3rd prosecution witness (PW-3).
He was also led in evidence by Pinheiro, the anti-graft agency’s lawyer.
The exhibits tendered included the school’s statements of account, admission letters for the defendant's children, and payment receipts.
The witness confirmed the different classes the children were admitted into.
Exhibit 12P was also tendered, which was a contractual agreement for post-paid school fees for the children.
The prosecution tendered a letter from the EFCC to AIS, Abuja, through the court registrar.
The court marked it as Exhibit 18 and an account provided by the EFCC for a refund.
Justice Nwite adjourned the matter until March 7 for continuation of trial.