DSS witness narrates how EFCC chairman was allegedly blackmailed
A witness from the Department of State Services (DSS), Yusuf Adams, has told the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja, how the Chairman of the EFCC was blackmailed by a defendant
A witness from the Department of State Services (DSS), Yusuf Adams, has told the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja, how the Chairman of the EFCC was blackmailed by a defendant through a Facebook posting.
He said that this was obtained when he explored the defendant’s phone and Facebook page during investigation.
Adams said this led to the revelation of videos in which Moses Oddiri accused the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr Ola Olukoyede.
He said the anti-corruption boss was accused of intercepting and stealing ₦4 billion released by Heritage Operational Services Limited in favour of the Orogun Community in Delta.
Adams, who testified as the first prosecution witness before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, identified himself as a personnel of the DSS serving in the Economic Intelligence and Investigation Department.
When asked if he knew the defendant, he responded: “Yes, my lord, I got to know him in the course of investigating his case.”
The witness told the court that on Sept. 23, 2025, his office received a petition from the EFCC alleging that Oddiri had published and circulated on social media false allegations that the EFCC Chairman embezzled over ₦4 billion.
The sum said to be royalties released by Heritage Operational Services Limited in favour of the Orogun community and recovered by the commission.
“Based on this, my director instructed me and my team to investigate the matter,” Adams said.
He further disclosed that Oddiri was arrested on Nov. 10, 2025 in Lagos and brought to the DSS office for interview.
Read Also: Ribadu: DSS’ failure to produce El-Rufai stalls arraignment on alleged unlawful phone bugging charge
“During the interview which was audio-visually recorded in the presence of a legal aid counsel, Oddiri volunteered his statement under caution. Other witnesses were also invited and were interviewed,” he said.
According to him, the investigative team explored the defendant’s Facebook page and downloaded several videos in which he allegedly accused the EFCC Chairman, adding that the team requested receipts and bank statements from First City Monument Bank (FCMB) and Zenith Bank.
The team also requested incorporation documents from the Corporate Affairs Commission relating to community development entities operating OML 30 in Delta State, including the Orogun Kingdom Community Trust registered by the defendant.
“We also obtained copies of letters of admonishment from the EFCC to a petition submitted by the defendant to the Commission.
“The petition written by the defendant accused the EFCC Chairman and was addressed to the Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom, and a letter written by Wahab Shittu, (SAN), counsel to the EFCC Chairman, requesting the defendant to retract the allegation.
“We, thereafter, submitted a preliminary report to our superior,” Adams said.
On further steps taken, the witness stated: “My lord, we filed a certificate of compliance.
“Based on the recommendation of the preliminary report, we also requested information from the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, the industry regulator for the petroleum industry.”
Earlier in the proceedings, prosecution counsel, C.S. Orubor, had informed the court that the matter was slated for commencement of trial and consideration of bail.
“We are ready to proceed and our witness is in court,” he said.
Defence counsel, M. Adeniran, objected to the commencement of trial, claiming he had no access to his client who had been in DSS custody.
“We have a challenge in the issue of trial. The defendant has been in the detention of DSS, we have no access to him,” Adeniran told the court.
In spite of the objection, Justice Abdulmalik directed that the trial should commence.
The defence counsel maintained: “My lord, it’s a criminal trial and he has been in detention and has not been able to brief us. The DSS didn’t oblige us to see him.
“He has not been able to brief us on his defence. I am in court today but I don’t know what the matter is all about because I don’t have access to the defendant to brief me.”
The defendant also addressed the court, stating that his lawyer had not been briefed and that he did not know the facts of the case.
However, Orubor countered the defence’s position, insisting that all relevant materials had been duly served.
“It’s quite unfortunate that my learned friend is trying to mislead the court. He has been fully served with all the materials the prosecution intends to use.
“He was in court on the last adjourned date and he knows the business of the day,” he said.
After confirming that the defence had been served with the charge and that it had been endorsed, Justice Abdulmalik ruled that the criminal trial would proceed.
She, however, adjourned the matter to March 13 for continuation of trial and hearing of the bail application.
Oddiri was arraigned on a two- count charge bordering on cybercrimes punishable under Section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) (Amendment) Act 2024.
(NAN)
