Justice Mojisola Dada of an Ikeja Special Offences Court has denied the request from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, to admit a document as evidence in the ongoing trial of Ahmed Kuru, the former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria, AMCON, and four other defendants.
The EFCC has accused the defendants of defrauding Arik Air of N76 billion and $31.5 million.
The other defendants being prosecuted by the EFCC include Kamilu Omokide, a former receiver manager of Arik Air Limited, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Arik Air Chief Executive Officer, Union Bank Limited and Super Bravo Limited.
After considering the arguments from both sides, the judge ruled that the witness testifying was not part of the investigation team.
“It is established that the party must lay the foundation for the document sought to be tendered under the Evidence Act. The public document must be certified by a public official,” the judge stated.
Citing various precedents from higher courts, Justice Dada ruled against the admissibility of the document presented by the witness.
“The witness is not a member of AMCON and therefore does not possess the original document. Proper certification is crucial, as defined by law. This document cannot be tendered by this witness.”
Earlier in the proceedings, Dr. Wahab Shittu, SAN, announced his appearance for the prosecution, while Prof. Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, represented the first and third defendants.
Olasupo Sashore, SAN, appeared for the second defendant, and Mr. Olalekan Ojo, SAN, represented the fourth defendant, with the fifth defendant being represented as well.
The prosecution witness, Mr. Austen Obigwe, who was led in evidence by Shittu, stated that he was a Group Executive Director in Corporate and International Banking at Union Bank.
He said he was a board member and handling transactions with the U.S EXIM Bank, for which Union Bank provided a guarantee.
He further stated, “We also had a second transaction for two wide-body aircraft: an A340-500 and a from Germany, COFACE of ECGB of the UK. The three are also shareholders. The two Boeings were financed by export credit agencies. There was no payment; Union Bank did not commit any funds for the guarantee of the 85 per cent.”
Obigwe further narrated that the two wide-body aircraft were used for flights from Nigeria to New York.
“Unfortunately, since Arik stopped flying to New York, no other Nigerian airline has been able to do so directly. Until I left the bank in 2009, all facilities extended to Arik were performing well; there was no default.”
Obigwe, a retired Union Bank staff, confirmed that the bank acted as a guarantor for Arik Air in procuring five aircraft: three Boeing 737-800 and two Airbus A340-500. He noted that the three Boeing 737-800 were used for domestic operations, while the wide-body aircraft were deployed for international routes, including New York in the U.S. and London in the U.K.
However, when the prosecution sought to admit a report from a meeting held by stakeholders in London, the defence objected to its admissibility.
Ojo, SAN, argued that the documents were neither signed nor dated, while Osipitan questioned their authenticity and asked the witness to clarify their source.
He stressed that the law requires original documents to be certified. In response, Shittu, SAN, contended that the document was relevant to the case, regardless of its status.
“Even if the document was stolen, as long as it is relevant to the case, my lord, it is admissible in court,” Shittu stated.
Justice Dada, in her ruling, refused the document’s admissibility due to a lack of proper identification.
She confirmed that the document could not be tendered by the witness as he was not one of the EFCC investigation officers.
Subsequently, the judge adjourned till May 19, 2025, for the continuation of the trial.
