By EDITH NWAPI

Halima Kazeem, an Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness, told an Abuja court that a former General Manager with the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Aminu Baba-Kusa, gave his statement voluntarily.

The EFCC charged former National Security Adviser (NSA) Col. Sambo Dasuki, Baba-Kusa, Acacia Holdings Limited and Reliance Referral Hospital Limited with criminal breach of trust, dishonest release and receiving various sums of money to the tune of N33.2 billion.

The EFCC accused Dasuki, among others, of releasing the equivalent of N10billion in foreign currencies from the NSA’s account.

The account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) was for the 2014 presidential primary election of the then ruling People’s Democratic Party.

The judge, Justice Charles Agbaza, had ordered for trial -within-trial to ascertain the voluntariness of Amina Baba-Kusa’s statement.

The order was given owing to Solomon Umoh SAN’s objection to EFCC tendering of his (Baba-Kusa)’s statements in evidence.

The EFCC’s first witness, in the trial-within-trial at the resumed sitting on Tuesday.

Testifying, Kazeem, who led a team of investigators, said the defendant was not tortured verbally or physically.

“He was treated with the utmost respect as a suspect,” Kazeem, who is an Assistant Commandant I of the EFCC said.

When asked if the defendant had his lawyer present or during a video recording as stipulated by the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, she said:”the issue of video coverage was not mandatory”.

Umoh argued that “a statement cannot be voluntary while the defendant was in the underground cell of the EFCC,” and there was no compliance with Section 15(4) and 17 (2) of the Administration of Justice Act 2015.

The witness told the court that while the law mandated video coverage when a witness statement was taken, “as of Nov. 2015, the issue of video coverage was not mandatory.”

She also insisted that the second defendant’s lawyer was present when his seven statements were taken.

Kazeem said Baba-Kusa had access to many visitors.

The prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN tendered Baba-Kusa’s statements written between November and December 2015, there are admitted in evidence since the defendants’ counsel did not object to them.

Umoh, the insisted that the second defendant, when he first reported to the commission, came with his financial secretary, company secretary and his son.

However, not all the statements Baba-Kusa made were taken by Kazeem?

The witness referring to the fourth statement, noted that it was not counter-signed by any other person but the defendant alone.

She told the court that, that statement was obtained by a member of the investigations team on the day the EFCC searched his (2nd defendant)’s office and house over three hours.

She added that on the day of the EFCC search of his home and office, his statement was taken over the course of three hours by an assigned investigator

She told the court that the length of time was “based on the volume of items recovered from his house and office.”

“I did not induce the second defendant.”

When asked if Baba-Kusa was induced to act as a witness against Dasuki, the witness replied, “I did not induce the second defendant.

“All questions and interactions between the second defendant and me were based on the facts of the investigations.”

Umoh wanted to know while Baba-Kusa was kept in a seven-day detention.

The witness, explained that the defendant could not meet his bail conditions.

Umoh insisted that the EFCC did not provide Baba-Kusa ample time to meet his condition.

She however, insisted that he had access to his phone and visitors anytime he wanted.

Reading from Baba-Kusa’s statement, the Umoh said, “The witness begged to be allowed for two weeks?

However, Jacobs objected that Umoh could not rely on the statement following his argument that it was involuntary.

Justice Agbaza, allowed Umoh to continue.

Jacobs insisted that the defence was making findings.

Objecting to that, Umoh said he was trying to create a picture of a man in bondage.

He continued reading; he requested two weeks out, to dispose of his properties of N2.2 billion, and if the sales went through, will use some of the money, “it was here you induced him to serve as a witness.”

The witness asserted that that was Baba-Kusa’s choice, and “he has not refunded the money to date.”

To show the condition the defendant was held at the EFCC, Ebie Richard, fourth defendant counsel asked if Baba-Kusa was detained in an underground facility.

The witness replied, “The cell in Idiagbon’s house, based on the topology, is in the basement.”

After the cross-examination, Justice Agbaza adjourned until Wednesday for continuation of the trial-within-trial. (NAN)

Update news