The trial of Yahaya Bello, former governor of Kogi, continued on Wednesday before Maryanne Anineh, judge of the federal capital territory (FCT) high court in Maitama, Abuja, with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) presenting evidence of multiple suspicious cash withdrawals allegedly linked to the state government accounts.
Bello is standing trial alongside Abdulsalami Hudu and Umar Shuaibu Oricha on a 16-count charge of criminal breach of trust and money laundering involving N110.4 billion.
During the hearing, the sixth prosecution witness, Mashelia Bata, a compliance officer with Zenith Bank, continued his testimony under the lead examination of Kemi Pinheiro, the EFCC counsel.
Bata was asked to give details of deposits and withdrawals from the Kogi state government house account between February 2016 and February 2018 involving the second defendant, Hudu.
The witness confirmed multiple transactions of N10 million each, which, according to him, stood at N1.09 billion as of February 2, 2018.
On inflows, Bata said the account received N50 million from the Kogi state statutory revenue account, which was sent into the account on August 2, 2016; another N50 million from Idhu Integrated Services on August 9; and N15.5 million from the ministry of finance on August 10.
He further detailed other withdrawals made over the next couple of months by Hudu and told the court that the account at one point had a zero balance but later received credits in the sum of N74.378 million on December 6, 2016.
“On the same day, there were cash withdrawals totalling N30 million in favour of Mohammed Jamiu Salihu,” he said.
The witness went on to detail other rounds of withdrawals and transfers to private entities and individuals.
He also identified documents showing dollar transfers to the American International School, Abuja, and other recipients linked to accounts held by Alyeshua Solutions Services and Whales Oil and Gas.
After the testimony, Abdullahi Yahaya, defence counsel, asked for an adjournment to allow the lead defence lawyer, J.B. Daudu, to study the witness’s evidence and prepare for cross-examination.
However, the EFCC counsel opposed the request, arguing that the defence had no valid reason for an adjournment, noting that all documents had already been tendered while both sides were present during the witness’ testimony.
Ruling on the request, the judge said adjournments were at the discretion of the court but could be granted in the interest of justice.
“I have considered the application for adjournment. It is correct that adjournment can only be granted at the discretion of the court,” she said.
“However, in the interest of justice, I believe the matter should be adjourned till tomorrow, November 13, 2025, for cross-examination and continuation of trial.
