Table of Contents
A mild drama unfolded at the Kwara State High Court on Thursday during the continuation of the hearing in the N5.78 billion case brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against former governor Abdulfatah Ahmed and his former Commissioner for Finance, Alhaji Demola Banu.
Both Ahmed and Banu were present in court; however, the proceedings were interrupted midway due to a disagreement between the defense counsels and the EFCC team regarding the alleged improperly paginated documents presented as exhibits.
For several minutes, EFCC counsel Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) and lead counsel for the defendants, Kamaldeen Ajibade (SAN), debated the improper arrangement of the documents that had been served to the latter and subsequently submitted to the court.
Jacobs had submitted the documents for admission as exhibits, but the defendants' counsel contended that the "bundle of documents" differed from what was provided to them, and they were also not arranged or numbered appropriately to assist the court in the proceedings.
Jacobs, on the other hand, argued that the documents provided to the defense counsels, which were also presented to the court, were identical to those in his possession.
He maintained that it was not the responsibility of his team to number the documents tendered for the defense counsels.
After considering both parties' arguments and thoroughly reviewing the documents in question, the presiding judge, Justice Mahmud Gafar, concurred with the defense counsel's assertion that the documents needed to be properly organized.
The judge then adjourned the case until February 16, 2026, for the continuation of the hearing to allow the EFCC legal team time to organize the documents properly.
Responding to questions from journalists after the adjournment, Ajibade stated that the request for proper arrangement of the documents was justified as it pertains to the "proof of evidence."
"A criminal matter should not be ambushed. What has been served to us was not adequately highlighted," he argued.
Jacobs, while insisting that it was not his team's responsibility to arrange the documents, acknowledged that they conceded to the request in the interest of fairness.
"They claimed the documents were not paginated and not arranged in chronological order as we submitted them. While it is not our duty to number the documents for them, we conceded to their request in the spirit of fairness," he stated.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the reason for the court drama?
The drama unfolded due to a disagreement between the defense counsels and the EFCC team regarding the alleged improperly paginated documents presented as exhibits.
What did the judge decide regarding the documents?
The judge agreed with the defense counsel that the documents needed to be properly arranged and adjourned the case until February 16, 2026, for this purpose.
What did the defense counsel argue about the documents?
The defense counsel argued that the bundle of documents differed from what was served to them and were not organized or numbered correctly, which is essential for the proceedings.
Eze Chidiebere Paul
I'm dedicated to creating high-quality content that informs, inspires, and delights. If you have any questions or suggestions, don't hesitate to get in touch. Happy reading!
