An Ikeja Special Offences Court has postponed further proceedings in the trial of former Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, Godwin Emefiele, until May 4, 2026, to rule on the admissibility of a key statement linked to the case.
Presiding judge, Justice Rahman Oshodi, fixed the date after lawyers for both the prosecution and defence adopted their final written submissions in a trial-within-trial.
The court is determining whether an extra-judicial statement made by co-defendant, Henry Omoile, was given voluntarily.
Emefiele is facing a 19-count charge involving alleged abuse of office, gratification, and corrupt practices connected to financial dealings said to involve about $4.5 billion and N2.8 billion. Omoile, on his part, is standing trial on a three-count charge bordering on the alleged unlawful acceptance of gifts tied to CBN-related transactions.
During proceedings, counsel to Omoile, Adeyinka Kotoye (SAN), argued that the central issue before the court is the voluntariness of the statement.
“The key question is whether the statement credited to the second defendant was made voluntarily,” Kotoye said.
He maintained that the process through which the statement was obtained did not comply with provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA).
.
“Where voluntariness is in dispute, video recording of the interrogation remains the most reliable way to demonstrate that due process was followed,” he added.
Kotoye also questioned the credibility of the statement, alleging that it may have been influenced by coercion or inducement, and argued that the presence of a legal practitioner alone does not guarantee fairness.
Counsel to Emefiele, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), aligned with the argument, urging the court to reject the statement.
“Any uncertainty surrounding the voluntariness of a statement must be resolved in favour of the accused,” Ojo said.
He cited provisions of the Evidence Act, stressing that statements obtained through oppression or improper means are inadmissible.
“The burden is on the prosecution to prove that the statement was made freely, and that burden has not been discharged,” he argued.
However, the prosecution, led by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), insisted that the statement was lawfully obtained and should be admitted as evidence.
“The defence cannot challenge a statement they did not object to at the point it was tendered. Doing so amounts to an abuse of court process,” Oyedepo said.
He further argued that the absence of video recording does not invalidate the statement, noting that it was taken in the presence of the defendant’s lawyer.
“The content of the statement itself shows there was no duress. The second defendant neither implicated the first defendant nor admitted to any wrongdoing,” he said.
Oyedepo dismissed allegations of intimidation, adding that due process was followed throughout.
“The defendant was properly cautioned, the statement was taken in the presence of multiple individuals, and he voluntarily signed the necessary documents,” he stated.
Following the arguments, Justice Oshodi adjourned the case for ruling on May 4 and scheduled June 26 and June 30, 2026, for the continuation of the main trial.
