Former Nigerian Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, and her co-defendants are awaiting a jury verdict after both the prosecution and defence closed their cases at the Southwark Crown Court in the United Kingdom.
Alison-Madueke is standing trial alongside oil executive Olatimbo Ayinde and her brother, Doye Agama, over a five-count charge relating to alleged bribery. The three defendants have all pleaded not guilty.
British prosecutors allege that Alison-Madueke accepted luxury items and high-value properties from oil industry figures seeking favourable treatment in the award of oil contracts during her tenure as petroleum minister between 2010 and 2015.
According to the prosecution, there is no documentary evidence showing that the benefits were reimbursed or linked to legitimate financial arrangements.
In his closing address, defence counsel, Jonathan Laidlaw, argued that prosecutors failed to charge the alleged bribe givers and relied on what he described as incomplete and unreliable evidence.
He questioned the handling of evidence recovered during a 2015 raid on Alison-Madueke’s Abuja residence, alleging procedural irregularities, including the absence of key officials and a lack of photographic documentation showing where items were originally found.
Laidlaw also maintained that documents which could support the defence including records of reimbursements and official ministerial activities were missing. He criticised the prosecution’s reliance on materials linked to Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) while rejecting parts of the same evidence relating to Ayinde.
The defence further disputed claims that official travel and financial records connected to the former minister were unavailable, describing the prosecution’s position as contradictory.
Responding for the prosecution, lead counsel Alexandra Healy argued that oil executives provided improper benefits to Alison-Madueke while their companies secured lucrative government contracts.
Healy told the court that the alleged arrangements were incompatible with public office and unsupported by any evidence of reimbursement.
She also referenced a £1 million payment linked to businessman Benedict Peters, alleging that intermediary structures were used to conceal the nature of the transaction.
The prosecution further noted that Alison-Madueke had been aware of the investigation for nearly 10 years.
With both sides having concluded their submissions, the jury is expected to deliver its verdict later this week.
