From Victor Osula, Abuja
The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a no-case submission filed by former Acting Accountant-General of the Federation, Chukwuyere Anamekwe Nwabuoku, in his ongoing ₦868 million money laundering trial.
Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling delivered on Thursday, held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had established a prima facie case against Nwabuoku, necessitating that he open his defence.
Nwabuoku is facing a nine-count amended charge filed by the EFCC, accusing him of conspiring with several companies to divert public funds while serving as Director of Finance and Accounts at the Ministry of Defence between 2019 and 2021.
The companies named in the charge include Temeeo Synergy Concept Limited, Turge Global Investment Limited, Laptev Bridge Limited, and Arafura Transnational Afro Limited.
According to the anti-graft agency, the alleged offences contravene Section 18 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and are punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.
Nwabuoku was appointed Acting Accountant-General of the Federation on May 20, 2022, by former President Muhammadu Buhari, following the suspension of Ahmed Idris over an alleged ₦80 billion fraud.
However, his tenure lasted barely two months before he was removed in July 2022 after reports emerged that he was under EFCC investigation.
At his arraignment, Nwabuoku pleaded not guilty to all charges. His counsel, Norrison Quakers (SAN), had urged the court to discharge him, arguing that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case.
He maintained that the evidence presented by the EFCC was insufficient to warrant his client’s defence.
The EFCC, however, opposed the application, insisting that it had presented credible evidence, including testimonies from nine witnesses and several exhibits, linking Nwabuoku to the alleged offences.
The Commission urged the court to dismiss the no-case submission.
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho agreed with the EFCC, stating that the evidence before the court was strong enough to require the defendant to explain his role in the alleged diversion of funds.
The case has been adjourned for the opening of the defence.
