Ex-CBN Gov Emefiele Challenges EFCC In Court, Alleges Torture

A former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, on Friday challenged the admissibility of a bundle of statements sought to be tendered by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in his ongoing trial over alleged $4.5 billion and ₦2.8 billion fraud and abuse of office.

Naija News reports that Emefiele, through his lead counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), told Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State High Court that the statements were allegedly obtained under oppressive, dehumanising and torturous conditions while the former CBN governor was in EFCC custody.

Ojo argued that the statements were not made voluntarily, alleging that his client was held incommunicado for more than 157 days before the statements were obtained.

“The objection is predicated on the provisions of the Evidence Act and the Anti-Torture Act,” Ojo told the court.

He submitted that Section 4 of the Anti-Torture Act prohibits the admission of any confession or statement obtained through torture or other inhumane treatment.

“These statements are products of acts intended to force the first defendant to say what he did not intend to say, having been held incommunicado for over 157 days in EFCC custody,” he argued.

The issue arose after the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), sought to tender the statements through the fourth prosecution witness, Alvan Ikoku.

While being led in evidence, Ikoku told the court that the EFCC invited Emefiele for questioning and obtained statements from him on different dates, including October 26 and 27, 2023.

Following the testimony, Ojo urged the court to conduct a trial-within-trial to determine whether the statements were voluntarily made before deciding on their admissibility.

He maintained that the prosecution had the duty to prove that any statement it sought to rely on was made freely and without oppression.

“It is a fundamental requirement that any statement sought to be admitted in evidence must have been made voluntarily and not under oppression,” Ojo submitted.

In response, Oyedepo informed the court that the prosecution was withdrawing the statement dated October 26, 2023, saying it only contained Emefiele’s personal identification details.

The defence did not object to the application, and Justice Oshodi struck out the statement.

However, the prosecution opposed the defence’s request for a trial-within-trial in respect of the remaining statements, arguing that they were not confessional statements and therefore did not require such a procedure.

Oyedepo also argued that the Evidence Act, being the law specifically governing the admissibility of evidence, should prevail over the Anti-Torture Act on issues of procedure.

“The statements are not confessional. Therefore, there is no basis for a trial-within-trial,” he argued.

He urged the court to accelerate the hearing in the matter, citing the public interest involved in the case.

Replying, Ojo insisted that the court must first resolve the question of voluntariness before admitting the statements in evidence.

According to him, the prosecution failed to address the defence’s claim that the statements were allegedly obtained through torture, oppression and dehumanising treatment.

“The issue of voluntariness can only be resolved through a trial-within-trial. Only after such a mini-trial can the court properly determine whether the statements are admissible,” he submitted.

After listening to arguments from both sides, Justice Oshodi adjourned ruling on the admissibility of the statements until July 9, 2026.

The judge also fixed October 6, 7, 8 and 9, 2026, for continuation of the substantive trial.