Alleged fraud: Court admits extra-judicial statement of Emefiele’s co-defendant
An Ikeja Special Offences Court yesterday admitted in evidence the extra judicial statement made by Henry Omoile, the co-defendant to the embattled former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin
An Ikeja Special Offences Court yesterday admitted in evidence the extra judicial statement made by Henry Omoile, the co-defendant to the embattled former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele.
The trial judge, Justice Rahman Oshodi, ruled that Omoile’s statement was admissible in the ongoing trial of the former CBN governor.
Omoile had challenged the admissibility of his statements to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), alleging that his statement was not voluntarily given but obtained under oppression and inducement.
This led to a “trial-within-trial” to determine the voluntariness or otherwise of the statement.
Omoile is currently facing a three-count charge bordering on unlawful acceptance of gifts as an agent, while Emefiele is facing a 19-count charge the EFCC filed against him over alleged gratification and corrupt demands during his tenure as the apex bank’s governor.
Read Also: Nigeria and Airbus sign pact to boost aerospace development
Both defendants pleaded not guilty to all charges.
During the resumed hearing yesterday, C. C. Okezie appeared for the prosecution while Labi Lawal (SAN) appeared for the first and the second defendants.
In a ruling, Justice Oshodi held that the prosecution had successfully proved that the statements obtained on February 26, 2024 were made voluntarily and not under any form of inducement, threat, or coercion.
“I have carefully considered the evidence presented during the mini-trial. The environment was active, and there is no evidence that the second defendant was physically harmed. I am satisfied that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was made voluntarily,” the judge stated.
The court also ruled that the statements the defendant made on February 26, 2024, marked as Exhibits 1–3, were not obtained under duress and were, therefore, admissible as evidence.
But the court declined to admit the statements dated February 27, 2024, rejecting them because they were reportedly not made in the presence of a legal practitioner or under video recording.
Following the ruling, Justice Oshodi adjourned the case till June 26, 30, and July 6 and 8, for continuation of the trial.
