Connect with us

Judiciary

Alleged ₦76bn, $31.5m Fraud: Court Adjourns Trial of Ex-AMCON MD, Ahmed Kuru, Others till June 25

Published

4 weeks ago

on

Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, adjourned further hearing in the alleged ₦76 billion and $31.5 million fraud trial involving a former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), Ahmed Kuru, and others till June 25, 2026.

Kuru, alongside Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Roy Ilegbodu, Union Bank of Nigeria Plc and Super Bravo Limited, is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a six-count charge bordering on conspiracy, stealing and abuse of office.

One of the counts reads:

“That you, Union Bank Nigeria Plc, sometime in 2011 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with the intention of causing and/or inducing the unwarranted sale of Arik Air loans and bank guarantees with Union Bank, made false statements to AMCON regarding Arik Air Limited’s performing loans, following which you transferred a bogus figure of ₦71,000,000,000.00 (Seventy-One Billion Naira) to AMCON.”

Another count reads:

“That you, Ahmed Lawal Kuru, Kamilu Alaba Omokide, as Receiver Manager of Arik Air Limited, and Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Chief Executive Officer of Arik Air Limited in receivership, sometime in 2022 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, fraudulently converted to the use of NG Eagle Limited the sum of ₦4,900,000,000.00 (Four Billion, Nine Hundred Million Naira), property of Arik Air Limited.”

During cross-examination by counsel to the first and third defendants, Prof. Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, at Tuesday’s proceedings, the fourth prosecution witness (PW4), Usman Bawa Kaltungo, stated that AMCON only purchases secured non-performing loans from banks and not all categories of debts.

The prosecution team, led by Wahab Shittu, SAN, also opposed the admissibility of certain letters allegedly written by the first and third defendants to the EFCC on the grounds that the documents were photocopies and had not been certified.

“It is a photocopy. On that basis, it is inadmissible; it lacks certification. If they intend to rely on them, then they should have certified them,” the prosecution argued.

Responding, Osipitan urged the court to reserve the objection until the stage of final written addresses.

In her ruling, Justice Dada held that since the original copies were with the EFCC and had been identified by the witness, they should be produced in court whenever necessary.

The court consequently directed that the original copies be produced on the next adjourned date, while the documents were admitted and marked as Exhibit P53.

At the prompting of the defence counsel, the witness read portions of the letter from AMCON to the EFCC seeking intervention to avert the arraignment of some AMCON officials.

According to the witness, the letter stated that all actions taken by AMCON and the receiver managers were decisions of the corporation’s Board of Directors arising from official meetings.

When asked whether he had seen any reply from the EFCC acknowledging that the first and third defendants acted in their official capacities, the witness replied:

“That is their opinion. To the best of my knowledge, that letter was addressed to the Chairman. It is not all correspondence that the EFCC replies to. I neither saw nor knew of any reply.”

Asked whether AMCON as an institution was charged in the matter, the witness responded in the negative.

On whether any funds were traced to the personal accounts of the first and third defendants as proceeds of the alleged fraud, the witness said:

“None.”

While referring the witness to Exhibit P17, a petition written by Falana & Falana Chambers, the defence counsel asked whether Arik Air was already in receivership when the petition was written.

The witness responded that the petition, dated April 27, 2022, was written after Arik Air had gone into receivership, adding that the shareholders authorised Falana & Falana to act on behalf of the airline.

Asked whether he had documents showing that the Nigerian debts in question were being serviced as and when due, the witness answered in the affirmative and tendered documents in support, adding that no bank had presented any contrary evidence.

The defence subsequently tendered a judgment of the Federal High Court earlier shown to the witness.

The document was admitted and marked as Exhibit P54.

When asked to identify the plaintiffs in Exhibit P54, the witness named Sir Johnson Arumemi-Ikhide and Mary Arumemi-Ikhide as shareholders.

Asked whether AMCON had petitioned the EFCC against Arik before the petition by Falana & Falana Chambers, the witness stated that he could not confirm what he had not seen unless it was shown to him.

During proceedings, the defence also asked whether the witness was aware that Arumemi-Ikhide had, in another matter, alleged that the EFCC compelled him under duress to make statements.

The witness answered in the negative.

At that point, the defence tendered court processes filed in 2025, which were admitted and marked as Exhibit P55.

After reading the exhibit, defence counsel insisted that Arumemi-Ikhide signed the documents under duress.

However, the witness maintained that he personally obtained his statement from start to finish and that there was nowhere in the statement where such an allegation was made.

“His statements are before the court. I do not know what he may have said elsewhere,” he said.

When the defence drew the witness’ attention to the fact that NG Eagle Limited had not been discharged from the offence alleged in Count Two of the charges, the witness explained that it was because the airline had not been sold.

“The ₦4.9 billion was expended based on the breakdown provided to the Commission by the Chief Finance Officer of Arik Air Receivership on how the money was utilised in establishing NG Eagle,” he stated.

When confronted with the suggestion that his testimony was based solely on hearsay, the witness disagreed.

“My evidence is informed not only by statements made but also by findings from investigations,” he said.

Asked into whose account the money was transferred, the witness stated:

“We interviewed the person who bought it, and they confirmed that payment was made to AMCON.”

On whether he was aware that one of the shareholders was merely a nominee shareholder, the witness replied that the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) documents described the individual simply as a shareholder.

During further cross-examination, Osipitan argued that the ₦4.9 billion belonged to Arik Air and not to Arumemi-Ikhide, a shareholder, as allegedly suggested in the charge.

The witness, however, maintained that the funds were revenue generated from Arik Air’s operations while in receivership and ought to have been applied toward servicing the airline’s loan obligations.

“In Count Three, the money was converted to the use of Magawshi Ali Mohammed, but his statement was not taken,” the witness added.

He explained that efforts were made to contact Mohammed, who was said to be outside the country, and that he eventually responded via email.

According to the witness, Mohammed stated in the email that the funds were meant for a trip to the Bahamas, although no documentary evidence was produced to support the claim.

Asked whether the information formed part of the investigation report, the witness answered in the affirmative.

When shown the investigation report in evidence, the witness read portions of pages 15 and 16, but acknowledged that the email itself had not been tendered before the court.

The witness also confirmed awareness of Arik Air’s Technical Advisory Committee headed by Dr. Harold Demuren, of which Mohammed was allegedly a member.

While the defence insisted that the Bahamas trip was official, the witness maintained that no supporting documents or correspondence were provided to investigators.

“For any official trip, there must be documents and correspondence authorising it. These were requested but not provided,” he said.

The witness added that the Chief Finance Officer was invited and asked to produce relevant correspondence but failed to do so.

Thereafter, the defence tendered documents seeking approval for a trip as internal memoranda.

Shittu objected to their admissibility, arguing that the documents were electronically generated and uncertified.

However, counsel to the first and third defendants countered that the documents were signed internal memoranda and not electronically generated records.

Justice Dada subsequently admitted the documents and marked them as Exhibits P56 to P59.

Asked what benefit Kamilu Alaba Omokide derived from the transaction, the witness said one share was allocated to him.

On whether there was any petition from JEM Leasing Limited, the witness replied in the negative.

“JEM owns the aircraft and leased it to Arik, but Arik itself submitted a petition,” he said.

The defence further stated that Arik had defaulted in rental payments to JEM and tendered a letter from the company.

Although the prosecution objected to its admissibility on grounds of lack of certification, Justice Dada admitted the document and marked it as Exhibit P60.

The case was thereafter adjourned till June 25 and July 7, 2026, for continuation of trial.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

EFCC

Alleged $6bn Mambilla Project Fraud: Witness Clarifies Certification of FEC Meeting Extracts

Published

4 days ago

on

June 11, 2026

By

The Fifth Prosecution Witness (PW5) in the trial of former Minister of Power, Olu Agunloye, on Wednesday, June 10, 2026, clarified issues surrounding the certification of the extract of the minutes of the Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting of May 21, 2003, before Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Apo, Abuja, following a formal request by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for certified extracts of the meeting.

The former minister is facing prosecution on an amended seven-count charge bordering on alleged official corruption and the fraudulent award of the Mambilla Power Project contract worth $6 billion to Sunrise Power Transmission Company Limited.

The witness, Iliya John Iyakwari, an Assistant Director of Legal in the Federal Ministry of Justice, currently serving in the Federal Ministry of Power as an Assistant Legal Adviser since August 2014, stated during cross-examination by defence counsel, Adeola Adedipe, SAN, that the request for a certified copy of the extract of the FEC meeting of May 21, 2003, was received from the EFCC in July 2023.

He explained that the certification was eventually done in 2024 because, upon receipt of the request letter from the User Department, the Legal Department forwarded a memo to the EFCC dated July 27, 2023, but the initial copy sent to the Commission was not certified, prompting the EFCC to return it.

“It was after it was received by the EFCC in July 2023 that they realised the extract was not certified. So, in January 2024, a staff of the EFCC brought back Exhibit Three K to my Legal Adviser, and the name of the EFCC staff is Babangida.

“He brought it personally and reminded my director that it was not certified. My director then gave me the document to certify. That is why my lord will see on the face of the document that the date it was certified, January 26, 2024, is different from the date it was forwarded. It was in the process of certification that I mistakenly stamped the original forwarding letter dated June 27, 2023. After stamping the document, I gave it back to my director, who I believe handed it over to Babangida because I left them afterwards,” he said.

When asked whether his earlier testimony suggesting certification in June 2023 was contradictory, prosecution counsel, Abba Mohammed, SAN, defended the witness’ position, insisting that the testimony was not contradictory and that court records spoke for themselves.

“My lord, I object to this particular question anchored on Exhibit PW5A, which was just tendered in court. What I see in our record, and what I believe is reflected in the records of the court, is that in his explanation, he summarised that all these activities were done in June 2023; he never said the certification was done in 2023.

“This objection is founded on Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which is superior to the Evidence Act. We will rely on the record of the court, particularly line 16,” he said.

The witness was also asked whether the document tendered in court by Babangida during his testimony was a different extract of the FEC meeting from the one he certified.

The prosecution counsel again objected, arguing that the witness, in line with court procedure, was absent from the courtroom during Babangida’s testimony and therefore could not be cross-examined on a document that was not tendered through him. He cited the case of Buhari v. INEC & Others (2008).

Justice Onwuegbuzie adjourned the matter until June 18 and July 2, 2026, for the continuation of trial.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Alleged ₦2bn Nigeria Air Fraud: How Sirika Allegedly Used Ethiopian Airlines as Fake Nigeria Air – Witness

Published

4 days ago

on

June 11, 2026

By

The 12th Prosecution Witness (PW12), Christopher Odofin, in the trial of former Minister of Aviation, Hadi Abubakar Sirika, on Wednesday, June 10, 2026, told Justice S.C. Oriji of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Abuja, how Sirika allegedly passed off an aircraft belonging to Ethiopian Airlines as the promised Nigeria Air by the government of the late President Muhammadu Buhari.

The decoy aircraft, adorned with the livery of the proposed Nigeria Air, landed on the tarmac of the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja, on May 27, 2023, three days before the expiration of the Buhari administration, and was flown back to Addis Ababa on the morning of May 29, 2023, the handover date to the succeeding government.

Hadi Sirika is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on an amended six-count charge bordering on alleged abuse of office and misappropriation of public funds amounting to over ₦2 billion, alongside his daughter, Fatima Hadi Sirika; son-in-law, Hamma Jalal Sule; and Al Buraq Global Investment Limited.

The contract for the establishment of Nigeria Air was awarded to Tianaero Nigeria Limited, a company belonging to Gabriel Tilmann, described as a close associate and friend of the former minister.

Reading from a portion of the contract agreement with Ethiopian Airlines, the witness, an investigator with the EFCC, stated: “The aircraft will depart from Addis Ababa (ADD) late evening of May 26, 2023, for it to be positioned early morning of May 27, 2023, at the Abuja (ABV) airport. The aircraft will stay at ABV airport for the static display of Nigeria Air livery until May 28, 2023. The aircraft will leave ABV airport early morning on May 29, 2023. The chartered flight will be operated by Ethiopian Airlines crew in Ethiopian Airlines uniforms. The Federal Government of Nigeria and Nigeria Air may put together local models who will be in Nigeria Air uniforms to pose for ceremonial pictures. The models may come to Addis Ababa so they may fly with the chartered flight to ABV.”

The witness told the court that the display of the aircraft at the Abuja International Airport was deliberately planned to coincide with the end of the first defendant’s tenure as Nigeria’s Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development on May 29, 2023, and to present the aircraft as evidence of the actualisation of his promise to revive Nigeria Air.

He further stated that after the less-than-72-hour display, the Nigeria Air logo was removed from the aircraft and it was returned to Ethiopian Airlines in Addis Ababa.

According to the witness, the investigating team also established that Ethiopian Airlines entered into a charter arrangement for the static display of the Nigeria Air livery for only three days, from May 27 to May 29, 2023. This was based on documents and information received from the airline in a letter dated June 12, 2023, sent in response to the EFCC’s request for information regarding Nigeria Air.

He added that although the contract was purportedly for the establishment of Nigeria Air, the charter agreement with Ethiopian Airlines was entered into on May 24, 2023—just five days before the expiration of Sirika’s tenure—and was solely for a static display of the Nigeria Air logo on an aircraft.

All documents tendered in evidence by the prosecution were shown to have been duly signed, authorised, and accompanied by certificates of identification. None of the counsel representing the four defendants objected to their admissibility.

Among the exhibits was a compact disc containing a voice note from the first defendant, Hadi Sirika, marked as Exhibit 37, which prosecution counsel applied to be played in court at the next adjourned date.

Further in his testimony, the witness disclosed that although the contract for the start-up of Nigeria Air was initially awarded to Tianaero Nigeria Limited for over ₦299 million on April 4, 2022, the company later received a contract extension on October 17, 2022, increasing the sum to over ₦599 million. He alleged that the extension was granted on the instructions and directives of the first defendant due to his relationship with the company’s alter ego.

According to him: “The investigating team arrived at this position when the phone of one Enitan Muyiwa Abel, who was a Permanent Secretary in the first defendant’s ministry, was analysed, revealing a voice note sent to the Permanent Secretary while the first defendant was in Spain, instructing him to ensure that the contract was awarded to Tianaero Nigeria Limited.”

Justice Oriji adjourned the matter until June 17, 2026, for the continuation of the trial.

Continue Reading

EFCC

EFCC Arraigns Three Over Alleged ₦10bn Fidelity Bank Fraud in Lagos

Published

4 days ago

on

June 11, 2026

By

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has arraigned three men and another suspect currently at large before the Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja over an alleged ₦10 billion fraud involving Fidelity Bank Plc.

The defendants, identified as Ibeh Emmanuel, Chidiebere Ihekoronye, Akubuo Chimuanya, and Austen Peaks Aniekan, who is currently at large, were brought before Justice Olubusola A. Okunuga on Wednesday on a five-count charge bordering on conspiracy, obtaining by false pretence, possession of fraudulent documents, and forgery.

According to the EFCC, the defendants allegedly conspired to fraudulently obtain ₦10 billion from Fidelity Bank Plc through forged documents and false representations.

One of the charges alleged that on or about April 16, 2026, the defendants, with intent to defraud, conspired among themselves to obtain the sum of ₦10 billion from Fidelity Bank Plc by falsely claiming that Maton Engineering Limited, which maintains account number 4011468821 with the bank, had issued an irrevocable standing order directing the reservation, blocking, and transfer of the funds in favour of Prospera Finance Limited, domiciled with Wema Bank Plc.

The anti-graft agency stated that the representation was false and that the defendants were fully aware of its falsity at the time it was made.

The commission further alleged that the defendants attempted to obtain the said amount based on the same purported instruction and false representation.

According to the charge, the alleged offences contravene Sections 1(1)(a), 8(a), and 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006.

The EFCC also accused Emmanuel of being in possession of a document purportedly issued by Fidelity Bank Plc confirming the existence of blocked funds amounting to ₦10 billion in favour of Prospera Finance Limited, which he allegedly knew to be false.

In addition, the defendants were accused of forging a document titled, “Confirmation of Ten Billion Naira (₦10,000,000,000.00) Blocked Funds in Favour of Prospera Finance Limited,” purportedly emanating from Fidelity Bank Plc.

The commission alleged that the document was knowingly fabricated without lawful authority, contrary to Section 365(1) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.

When the charges were read to them, the defendants pleaded not guilty.

Following their plea, prosecution counsel, A.A. Usman, urged the court to fix a date for trial and requested that the defendants be remanded in a correctional facility pending the determination of their bail applications.

Justice Okunuga subsequently ordered that the defendants be remanded at the Ikoyi Correctional Centre and adjourned the matter until June 18, 2026, for the hearing of their bail applications and the commencement of trial.

The EFCC stated that investigations into the alleged fraud are ongoing, while efforts are being intensified to apprehend the fourth defendant, Aniekan, who remains at large.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 JaraJournal.