The trial of Ali Bello, Chief of Staff to Ahmed Usman Ododo, continued on Monday before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja, with a prosecution witness linking several fund transfers to the first defendant.
Bello is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission alongside Dauda Sulaiman on a 16-count amended charge of alleged misappropriation and money laundering involving N10,270,556,800.00.
The 17th prosecution witness (PW17), Ahmed Audu Abubakar, an EFCC investigator, told the court that Exhibit F—a document recovered during investigation—detailed inflows and outflows of funds allegedly connected to the defendants.
Led in evidence by prosecution counsel Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, the witness identified a $91,000 outflow dated February 5, 2021, which he said was paid to “Oga Ali,” referring to Ali Bello.
“The $91,000.00 paid on February 5, 2021, was to ‘Oga Ali,’ which is the first defendant,” the witness told the court.
He also identified a February 6, 2021 entry of N150,000 released to “Presido.”
Explaining further entries, the witness said “Rashido” referred to one Abdulrasheed, who allegedly transported N150 million in cash from Lokoja to a Bureau de Change operator.
On transactions dated February 19, 2021, the witness pointed to an endorsement of N10 million paid to Ali Bello and N500,000 to Dauda Sulaiman.
“Alhaji Ali’ refers to the first defendant, while ‘Daud’ refers to the second defendant,” he stated.
Testifying on investigation findings relating to account number 1000688500 belonging to Dantata and Sawoe Construction Company, the witness said transfers of N80 million and N20 million were made for Plot 1060 in Gwarimpa, Abuja.
According to him, the N100 million total payment was reflected in Exhibit F.
“There were 10 entries of N10 million each, making a total of N100 million. The source is Maigari Murtala, an ally of the first defendant and a contact with the Bureau de Change operator,” he said.
The prosecution subsequently tendered the irrevocable power of attorney for the property, which was admitted and marked as Exhibit Q.
The prosecution’s attempt to tender the extra-judicial statements of the defendants—dated November 29 and 30; December 1, 10, 11 and 12, 2022 (for the first defendant), and November 30 and December 1, 2022 (for the second defendant)—was opposed by defence counsel.
The defence argued that the statements did not comply with Sections 15(4) and 17(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), particularly regarding the voluntariness and audio-visual recording of the statements.
After hearing arguments, Justice Omotosho ordered the immediate commencement of a trial-within-trial to determine the voluntariness of the statements.
During the sub-trial, PW17 maintained that the statements were voluntarily made.
“In EFCC, we have a standard. No threats, no promises, and statements were taken in the presence of their counsel, with Z.E. Abbas being the most present,” he said.
Following the proceedings, the statements were admitted in evidence after no further objections were raised by defence counsel.
Justice Omotosho subsequently discharged the witness after cross-examination and adjourned the matter to February 17, 2026 for continuation of the trial.
In this article