EFCC Urges Court to Dismiss Emefiele’s No-Case Submission in Alleged $6.23m Fraud Trial
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has urged the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama, Abuja, to dismiss the no-case submission filed by former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, insisting that the evidence presented by the prosecution warrants him to enter his defence.
The prosecution made the submission on Tuesday, October 20, 2026, before Justice Hamza Mu’azu, arguing that it had established a prima facie case against Emefiele in the trial involving an alleged $6.23 million fraud and other offences.
Emefiele is facing an amended 20-count charge bordering on alleged criminal breach of trust, forgery, abuse of office, conspiracy and obtaining money by false pretence. The charges also include allegations of conferring corrupt advantages in the award of CBN contracts.
Prosecution counsel and Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, argued that a no-case submission was intended to determine whether the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to require the defendant to respond, rather than to determine his guilt at that stage.
He maintained that asking Emefiele to enter his defence would not amount to requiring him to prove his innocence but would provide an opportunity to address the allegations raised against him.
On the contract-related charges, Oyedepo told the court that the prosecution had presented evidence linking Emefiele to companies allegedly associated with his wife, brother-in-law and other associates.
He cited approval signatures on exhibits and corporate records, including documents relating to Architekon Nigeria Limited, as evidence connecting the former CBN governor to the companies.
The prosecution also alleged that contracts valued between $6 million and $10 million were awarded without being subjected to the required review by the Major Contracts Tender Board.
According to Oyedepo, the Board, established under the Public Procurement Act, 2007, was responsible for reviewing contracts exceeding $1 million before forwarding recommendations to the CBN governor for approval.
He argued that bypassing the Board deprived the procurement process of the necessary scrutiny, particularly checks designed to determine whether CBN employees were directors of companies bidding for contracts.
Citing the testimony of a procurement department staff member, identified as PW10, the prosecution alleged that at least three companies submitted bids for each contract but that officials were instructed to process the bids in favour of a company linked to Emefiele’s associates.
Oyedepo further alleged that the company had access to the CBN’s in-house prices and subsequently submitted bids matching the exact amounts, thereby denying other prospective bidders a fair opportunity.
“The ingredient of the offence is the unfairness of the process,” he told the court.
The prosecution argued that the alleged offences were not negated by claims that the contracts had been completed or that the funds were not directly traced to Emefiele.
It also told the court that the company had operated for years without securing similar contracts until Emefiele became CBN governor, after which it allegedly received all 45 contracts under consideration.
Oyedepo further relied on evidence of transfers from Emefiele’s personal account to the company’s account, arguing that the transactions demonstrated his knowledge of the company and its directors.
He maintained that the approval of contracts was separate from recommendations made by officials and argued that Emefiele should have referred the contracts back to the Board instead of approving them.
“The recommendation would never be an approval,” he said.
EFCC Defends Forgery Allegation
On the alleged $6.23 million withdrawal, the prosecution told the court that the funds were withdrawn from the CBN between February and around June, before Emefiele’s removal from office.
The withdrawal was allegedly facilitated by letters attributed to former President Muhammadu Buhari and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha.
Oyedepo argued that testimonies from witnesses, including Mustapha and a forensic analyst, indicated that the letters used to facilitate the release of the funds were forged.
He also relied on the testimony of PW15, who reportedly told the court that an automatic system notification was sent to Emefiele when the relevant account went into debit following the withdrawal.
According to the prosecution, Emefiele allegedly failed to take action despite the notification, raising questions of criminal negligence and breach of trust.
Oyedepo further alleged that the funds were released to an individual on Emefiele’s instructions, with part of the money allegedly used to renovate one of his properties, while the balance was recovered from the individual.
Responding to the defence’s argument that the prosecution’s case was speculative, Oyedepo said there was a distinction between speculation and inferences drawn from legally admissible evidence.
He also argued that the absence of a forensic examination of Emefiele’s signature did not automatically defeat the forgery allegation, maintaining that the court could compare disputed signatures in accordance with the law.
The prosecution urged the court to consider a Supreme Court decision involving approximately $2 million and certain properties in the context of the allegations against the former CBN governor.
However, defence counsel, Mathew Burkaa, SAN, urged the court to discharge Emefiele, insisting that the prosecution had failed to establish the essential ingredients of the alleged offences.
“My lord, in the entirety of the charge, the prosecution failed to prove that he had conferred undue advantage on his wife and his associates,” Burkaa said.
The court stated that the date for ruling on the no-case submission would be communicated to the parties.
