Abdulrasheed Bawa, the Executive Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, has actually arrived at the Lagos State High Court being in Ikeja for more cross-examination in the supposed N1.4 billion fuel subsidy fraud trial of Mr. Abubakar Ali Peters and his company, Nadabo Energy Limited.

According to PM News, the case is prior to Justice C.A. Balogun.

Abubakar and his company are being prosecuted by the EFCC for allegedly utilizing created files to get N1,464,961,978.24 from the Federal Government as oil aid, after presumably pumping up the quantity of Premium Motor Spirit, PMS supposedly imported and supplied by the business.

They pleaded “not guilty” to the charges preferred against them.

The prosecution counsel, Seidu Atteh, had at the sitting on March 10, 2021, looked for to tender correspondences in between the EFCC and Petrocam Trading PYT Limited as well as the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) in relation to the alleged scams.

He had actually sought to tender them through the EFCC Chairman, Bawa, who is the fifth prosecution witness and the lead investigator.

The defence team, led by Osagie Isiramen, had, nevertheless, raised objections to the admissibility of the documents, mentioning several authorities, including Section 83 of the Evidence Act.

He had argued that the documents sought to be tendered were being brought to the understanding of the defence, during the pendency of the trial, a number of years after the case had currently begun.

In November 2021, Justice Balogun dismissed the objections raised by the defence as lacking in benefit.

With regard to the correspondence between the EFCC and Petrocam, Justice Balogun held that “The files sought to be tendered were already out there prior to this case was filed.

“Petrocam just offered files of what already took place to the EFCC; and so, there is not a surprise for the defence.”

On the objections raised to the admissibility of the correspondence between the EFCC and the CAC, the Judge advised the defence of its ruling on February 2, 2021, on a similar argument still being canvassed and said, “The Court is still bound by its ruling in relation to certifying officers and payment for accreditation and shall comply with its earlier ruling. Therefore, in the scenario, the objection is overthrown.”

ToriNG