No Power Of Attorney Was Presented On Behalf Of Yahaya Bello On Property – EFCC Witness

A prosecution witness, ,James Igbakuleh, told an Abuja court that no Power of Attorney was presented on behalf of former Governor of Kogi, Yahaya Bello on the property under investigation.

Bello is charged alongside Umar Oricha and Abdulsalam Hudu by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) with 16 counts of breach of trust.

Igbakuleh, who is the 11th witness of the EFCC, of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, added that he was also seeing the former governor for the fourth time.

“The first time was on Monday at the Federal High Court, then on Tuesday, yesterday and today at the FCT High Court,” Igbakuleh, a legal practitioner, said.

Under cross-examination by the 1st and 2nd Defendants’ Counsel, Paul Daudu, SAN, told the court that Shehu Bello contacted him after his client, SFC Foods Limited, approached him to sell the property, located at Adetokunbo Ademola, in Wuse II, sometime in 2021.

The witness said in his evidence that the payment for the said property was made into three designated accounts as instructed by his client.

He noted that, about 10 months after the conclusion of transactions, he was invited by one Mohammed at the EFCC, who said the agency was investigating a matter and that his name had featured prominently.

The witness was then shown a counter offer, deed of assignment and sales agreement, which he identified.

The counter offer and deed of assignment, addressed to Shehu Bello, were admitted in evidence and marked AV1 and AV2, respectively.

During cross-examination, the witness said he had practised law for 28 years.

He admitted that the person who contacted him, did not present any power of attorney on behalf of the former governor.

According to him, the deed of assignment was also not signed by all parties to the transaction.

“Confirm that AV2 (deed of assignment) was not signed by the purchaser,” Daudu SAN told the witness.

“It was not signed. I signed my portion and gave it to them,” he responded.

The witness also confirmed that he was not the one that prepared Exhibit AV2 and that he did not sign it in the presence of the purchaser.

Earlier, the 10th prosecution witness, Olomotane Egoro told the court that none of the lodgments or withdrawals, in the account before the court, were made by the third defendant, (Hudu)

Egoro said this under cross-examination by Counsel to the 3rd defendant, Zakari Abbas.

The witness’ attention was drawn to Exhibit AO, but he confirmed that the account opening package was not before the court.

He also admitted that he was not in a position to tell the court the signatories to the account.

Also, on Exhibit AJ, he said the defendant was not one of the depositors.

The prosecution also called its 12th witness, Mahmoud Abdulazeez, Chief Accountant at Dantata and Sawoe Construction Company Limited.

Taken in evidence by EFCC Counsel, Kayode Enitan, SAN, he identified a property on Plot 1160, Cadastral Zone C03, Gwarimpa 2, in Abuja, as land sold to Azbar Real Estate Limited on February 17, 2021.

He said the payment for the land was done in three tranches.

He added that the deed of assignment and power of attorney were signed by Mubarak Dantata and Nasir Dantata for Dantata and Sawoe, while Ali Bello signed for Azbar Real Estate.

The Prosecution then sought to tender the power of attorney and deed of assignment in evidence.

Paul Daudu SAN objected. based on Section 104 of the Evidence Act. The documents are public documents.

“I have examined the stamps on the documents. There was no indication of compliance on fee for certification.”

He noted that the defence counsel would withdraw their objections if the prosecution could provide the receipt.

The 3rd Defendant’s Counsel, Abbas, aligned with Daudu,

The Prosecution counsel agreed with the counsel that they were public documents but argued that they had been duly certified by the officers in whose custody they were.

He told the court that the first Defendant’s Counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, had raised the same objection before the Federal High Court.

“Justice Emeka Nwite ruled and dismissed it. I urge the court to overrule those objections so that we can proceed,” Enitan SAN said.

Daudu, however, argued that the question raised was not part of the decision before Justice Nwite.

In her ruling, Justice Maryann Anenih dismissed the objection and marked the Deed of Assignment as Exhibit AW1; and the Power of Attorney, as Exhibit AW2.

During cross-examination, Abdulazeez told the court that he had worked with Sawoe Construction Company for over nine years.

He confirmed that there was no amount stated in the document for the purchase of the property in question.

He was asked if, in the financial documents in Ehibit Z1, there was anywhere the name Ali Bello was mentioned.

“No,” the witness responded.

He confirmed that the 1st and 2nd defendants were also not listed as beneficiaries.

The EFCC then called its 13th witness, Yakubu Haruna a legal practitioner who admitted knowing a property at No. 35 Danube Street, Maitama.

The witness, admitted knowing one Palchi Nigeria Limited and the name Farouk Mustapha.

He said Palchi was registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission and that Farouk Mustapha was a shareholder and Director in the company.

He said negotiation on the property in question was done on behalf of White Tree Limited by one Barrister Ramalan Abdulahi.

The witness claimed that the deed of assignment and power of attorney were prepared in the name of Palchi Nigeria Limited as the donor, and White Tree Nigeria Limited as the donee.

He also claimed that the exchange of documents and payment for the said property were done in the office of one Murtala Maigari.

The witness maintained that he would not know the shareholders of the said company and that the defendants were not part of the transaction before the court.

He said he was meeting the former governor for the first time.

Prosecution counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, called the 14th witness, an internal auditor with the American International School, Abuja.

He said he had previously given evidence at the Federal High Court with respect to a case involving the first defendant.

He admitted knowing the defendant as a parent at AISA.

The prosecution sought to present some documents, including admission letters, email correspondence between the school and Ali Bello and the school’s statements of account, among others.

The defendants’ counsel objected but said they would provide their reasons at the address stage.

The exhibits were therefore admitted and marked AX4 to AX7.

The witness confirmed payments from Forza Oil and Gas Limited and Whales Oil and Gas Limited into the school’s account in favour of four students with the surname, “Bello”.

The payments ranged from $11,000 to $49,600 into different accounts belonging to the school.

He confirmed that all payments were in line with the agreement in Exhibit AX4 (agreement to pay school fees in advance).

After this, the prosecution counsel said he still had five to six witnesses to call on the matter before the court.

Justice Anenih then adjourned until May 5, for hearing of the pending application and continuation of trial.

Source: News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)