By Peter Omopo
The Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja has admitted into evidence the extra judicial statements allegedly made by former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), dismissing objections raised by the defence.
Justice Rahman Oshodi, in a ruling delivered on Thursday, held that the statements were admissible, ruling that the provisions of Section 4 of the Anti Torture Act, 2017, cited by Emefiele’s counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), did not necessitate a trial within trial to determine their admissibility.
The court agreed with the prosecution, led by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federal Ministry of Justice, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), that a trial within trial was unnecessary because the statements in question did not amount to confessional statements.
Justice Oshodi explained that for an extra judicial statement to qualify as a confession, it must contain a clear and unequivocal admission of the offences alleged against the accused. According to the judge, Emefiele’s statements did not constitute such an admission.
Consequently, the court admitted as exhibits the statements allegedly made by the former CBN governor on October 27, October 30, November 11, November 12 and November 13, 2023.
Following the ruling, Justice Oshodi adjourned the case to October 6, 7 and 8, as well as November 11, 12 and 13, 2026, for the continuation of trial.
Emefiele is standing trial alongside Henry Omoile on a 19 count charge bordering on alleged abuse of office, receiving gratification, accepting gifts through agents, corruption and fraudulent property transactions involving about $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion.
Omoile is separately facing a three count charge of allegedly receiving unlawful gifts connected to transactions involving the Central Bank of Nigeria.
Both defendants have pleaded not guilty to all the charges filed against them by the EFCC.
At the previous hearing, Emefiele’s counsel argued that the statements were obtained involuntarily after his client was allegedly subjected to oppression and torture during more than 157 days of detention by the Department of State Services (DSS).
The defence maintained that the statements were inadmissible under the Anti Torture Act and the Evidence Act, insisting that the absence of a video recording of the interrogation process undermined the prosecution’s claim that the statements were voluntarily made.
However, the prosecution countered that none of the statements amounted to a confession and urged the court to dismiss the defence’s objections, allowing the substantive trial to proceed.
With Thursday’s ruling, the court cleared the way for the prosecution to rely on the admitted statements as evidence as the high profile corruption trial continues.
