A defence witness on Thursday raised serious allegations against Nigeria’s leading anti-corruption agency during proceedings at a Lagos court, claiming that investigators attempted to compel a defendant to incriminate a former top financial official of the country.
The testimony was delivered at the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital, where a trial-within-a-trial is ongoing in the high-profile fraud case involving Godwin Emefiele, Nigeria’s former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, and his co-defendant, Henry Omoile.
Nnamdi Offial, a legal practitioner appearing as a defence witness, told the court that officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Nigeria’s principal agency for investigating financial crimes, allegedly sought to pressure his client, Henry Omoile, into making statements that would directly implicate Emefiele.
Offial explained that the testimony arose from a trial-within-a-trial ordered by Justice Rahman Oshodi to determine whether statements obtained from Omoile by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission were made voluntarily or under coercion. Okay News reports that such proceedings are commonly conducted to safeguard constitutional rights and ensure the admissibility of confessional statements.
According to the witness, investigators allegedly offered inducements to Omoile, including assurances of bail and the possibility of avoiding prosecution, if he agreed to provide evidence against the former Central Bank Governor.
Emefiele and Omoile are standing trial over allegations bordering on accepting gratification, receiving gifts through intermediaries, corrupt practices, and the fraudulent receipt of property. The charges, according to prosecutors, also include conferring corrupt advantages on associates, contrary to provisions of Nigeria’s Corrupt Practices Act of 2000. Both defendants have consistently pleaded not guilty to all charges.
During the resumed hearing on Thursday, Offial told the court that the head of the interrogation team allegedly assured Omoile that cooperation with investigators would result in lenient treatment. He further alleged that the statement-taking process was tightly controlled, with interrogators insisting on answers that aligned with their expectations.
“On several occasions, questions were put to the second defendant and he answered, but he was not allowed to write them down because the answers did not conform to what the interrogators wanted him to say. I objected to this many times,” Offial told the court.
He narrated that following an interrogation session on Monday, February 26, 2024, officials informed him that Omoile would continue to remain in detention. The following day, Offial said he discovered that his client was being interrogated in his absence, prompting him to challenge the process.
According to Offial, his intervention led to a confrontation with an officer identified as David, after which he was escorted out of the premises. He said he subsequently reported the incident to the team leader, who instructed him to remain in the waiting area.
Offial added that he was unable to see Omoile again until about 8:00 p.m., when officers returned him to the detention facility. He further told the court that he was informed Omoile had refused to cooperate with investigators and would therefore not be released, a development that led him to formally apply for bail from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission zonal head.
The witness disclosed that Omoile was detained for a total of twenty-one days, prompting him to file a fundamental rights enforcement suit at the Federal High Court in Lagos, Nigeria’s former federal capital territory.
According to Offial, Justice Muslim Hamza granted bail to Omoile but ordered that he be remanded at the Ikoyi Correctional Centre in Lagos pending the fulfillment of bail conditions.
However, during cross-examination by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission prosecutor, Rotimi Oyedepo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, several concessions were elicited from the witness.
Offial confirmed that investigators cautioned Omoile in his presence and that the defendant voluntarily signed the caution. He also admitted that he actively participated in the statement-taking process and understood that any written statement could be used against his client in court.
When asked whether he filed a formal complaint or petition alleging misconduct against the anti-graft agency, Offial acknowledged that he did not. He further admitted that the judge who heard the fundamental rights suit did not make any finding of misconduct against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, and that Omoile was not harassed in his presence.
Justice Rahman Oshodi subsequently adjourned the matter to Friday, January 16, 2026, for the continuation of the trial-within-a-trial proceedings.
