Court Admits Kogi High Court Orders as Ali Bello, Co-Defendant Allege Coerced Statements in N10bn Trial

The trial-within-trial in the alleged N10 billion money laundering case involving Ali Bello and his co-defendant, Dauda Suleiman, continued on Wednesday at the Federal High Court in Abuja, with both defendants maintaining that their statements to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission were obtained involuntarily.

The judge, James Omotosho, admitted in evidence, two certified true copies of judgments of the Kogi State High Court, despite objections from the prosecution. The documents were marked as Exhibits TWT-DA and TWT-DB.

Ali Bello, who serves as Chief of Staff to Kogi State Governor Ahmed Usman Ododo, is standing trial alongside Suleiman over allegations of laundering N10 billion during the tenure of former Governor Yahaya Bello.

The former governor is separately facing corruption charges before the Federal High Court over alleged diversion of state funds. All defendants have denied the allegations.

Earlier in the proceedings, defence counsel Abubakar Aliyu, SAN, and Olusegun Jolaawo, SAN, had opposed the prosecution’s attempt to tender eight statements allegedly made to the EFCC—six attributed to Ali Bello and two to Suleiman.

The statements were said to have been recorded between 29 November and 12 December 2022 for Ali, and on 30 November and 1 December 2022 for Suleiman.

Defence counsel argued that the statements were not made voluntarily, claiming their clients were threatened with detention and compelled to write dictated accounts.

In response, EFCC counsel Rotimi Oyedepo maintained that the statements were lawfully obtained and denied allegations of coercion.

Justice Omotosho consequently ordered a trial-within-trial to determine the voluntariness of the statements.

EFCC investigator, Audu Abubakar testified that neither team leader Adamu Yusuf nor investigator Yazid Bawa threatened or induced the defendants. He told the court that Ali Bello was properly cautioned and signed the cautionary form, choosing to write his statement without his lawyer present. He also denied the use of an electric chair or any form of torture.

Subsequently, Bawa and Yusuf, appearing as the second and third prosecution witnesses in the mini-trial, insisted that the statements were recorded voluntarily, in the presence of the defendants’ lawyers, and without threats or inducements.

At Wednesday’s sitting, Ali Bello’s counsel, E.A. Osayomi, informed the court that the defence would not call oral evidence but would tender two certified true copies of decisions of the Kogi State High Court, which ordered Bello’s release from EFCC custody in 2022.

Suleiman’s counsel did not object to the documents.

However, prosecution counsel Oyedepo opposed their admissibility, describing them as contentious. He argued that admitting the documents would be prejudicial because he would be unable to cross-examine Bello on them. He further questioned their authenticity, stating:

“The documents were scanned and printed, which is not in compliance with the rules of court. The receipt attached was generated this morning.”

Osayomi countered that the orders were being tendered because an EFCC witness had denied their existence. He maintained that the documents were properly obtained and paid for on 17 January 2026, adding that online payment for certified copies is the current practice in Kogi State.

Oyedepo further argued that the decision of the Kogi State High Court remains on appeal at the Court of Appeal of Nigeria, and reiterated that public documents could only be tendered from the bar where issues were not contentious.

Ruling on the objection, Justice Omotosho held that nothing prevented counsel from tendering the decisions and noted that the prosecution was equally free to produce contrary documents. He admitted the two judgments as exhibits. Ali Bello subsequently closed his case in the trial-within-trial.

Suleiman Alleges Dictation, Threats

Taking the stand as Defence Witness One (DW1), Dauda Suleiman testified that he was compelled to write statements dictated by EFCC officials.

He told the court that on 30 November 2022, he had gone to the EFCC office in Jabi, Abuja, to deliver food and drugs to Ali Bello. After dropping his name and phone number, he was asked to sit in an office where investigators Adamu Yusuf and Audu Abubakar later approached him.

According to Suleiman, Yusuf confronted him with documents and transaction records he claimed no knowledge of. He said Yusuf became angry and asked:

“Do you think we are here to play? Do you know about electric chairs?”

Suleiman said he pleaded to be allowed to leave because his wife had recently given birth. He testified that Abubakar urged him to cooperate, assuring him he would be released if he did as instructed.

“I agreed so they can allow me to go. The EFCC person was dictating the statements while I wrote them,” he said.

He stated that the process ended around 9 p.m., after which lawyer Z.E. Abbas allegedly signed the statements. Suleiman said he was subsequently taken to a cell, where he met Ali Bello and they ate the food together. He added that he wrote another statement on 1 December and remained in custody until arraignment.

Under cross-examination by Osayomi, Suleiman confirmed he was aware that Ali Bello had previously sued the EFCC seeking his release and that judgment was delivered in Bello’s favour, although he said Bello was not released at the time.

During cross-examination by Oyedepo, Suleiman admitted he never saw an electric chair during his detention. He also confirmed he had previously delivered food to Ali on 29 November without being arrested.

When asked whether a portion of his 30 November statement amounted to a confession, Suleiman answered in the affirmative but maintained it was dictated, except for his introductory details.

He acknowledged that lawyer Z.E. Abbas endorsed the statement as having been made voluntarily in his presence and confirmed that his signature appeared after the cautionary words. He also admitted knowing Abbas to be truthful and confirmed that the lawyer represented him in court after the statements were recorded.

Suleiman further admitted that a line in the statement stating, “In the course of all this money involved above I don’t know,” was written by him, though he insisted it was dictated.

He told the court he was not a party to the High Court case concerning Bello’s release and was unaware that the matter was pending before the Court of Appeal.

Following the conclusion of cross-examination and with no re-examination, Justice Omotosho adjourned proceedings to 24 February for adoption of written addresses in the trial-within-trial.