The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has debunked the reports that one of the statements by the former Accountant General of the Federation (AGF), Ahmed Idris, during the investigation on the alleged N109 billion fraud was missing.
There were media reports on Wednesday that the trial of the former Accountant General was stalled at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) as it was discovered that one of his statements during the EFCC investigation was missing from both his legal team file and those of the court and the EFCC.
However, the anti-graft agency in a statement on Thursday debunked the reports, saying that no document on the case file was missing, rather, trial within trial has begun on Idris and other defendants’ statements to determine whether the statements made by the defendants to the EFCC were obtained voluntarily.
Idris was re-arraigned alongside Olusegun Akindele, Mohammed Usman, and Gezawa Commodity Market and Exchange Limited on October 27, 2022, on 13 counts that bordered on alleged misappropriation of the sum of N109 billion.
The court on November 23, 2022, adjourned the hearing in the case after the counsel for the former AGF objected to further evidence by prosecution witness, Hayatudeen Suleiman who had been examined on 13 of the statements made by Idris.
He was testifying on the 13th statement already presented to the court when the defence objected, alleging that the statement was obtained from the defendant under duress.
The EFCC in a statement noted that the trial resumed on Wednesday for a trial within trial to prove the voluntariness, or otherwise, of the statements by the defendants, adding that an attempt by the defence counsel, Chris Uche (SAN) to argue the contention of the 1st defendant that his statements were obtained under duress was objected to by Leke Atolagbe who appeared for the prosecution.
According to the EFCC, Atolagbe argued that the onus was on the prosecution to prove that the statements by the defendants were obtained voluntarily and the court agreed with him.
“However, proceedings could however not continue after the defence counsel, Uche, SAN observed that the 13th statement obtained on 5th July, 2022, on which the prosecution counsel sought to examine his witness, was omitted from the proof of evidence front-loaded to the court by the prosecution.
“The prosecution acknowledged the inadvertent omission and sought for an adjournment to produce the statement. Justice Halilu Yusuf adjourned till May 11, for continuation of trial.”