‘My Evidence Against Mompha Was Dictated To Me’  -Witness

An Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness, Olayinka Jimoh, a.k.a. Nappy, in the ongoing trial of Ismaila Mustapha a.k.a Mompha, told Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court, Ikeja, Lagos, that his earlier evidence before against Mompha was based on what he was told the that Mompha said by the agency’s officials. 

The witness made the above assertion during a cross-examination, which was done virtually on Wednesday.

The EFCC had, on 12 January 2022, arraigned him alongside his company, Ismalob Global Investment Limited, on eight counts of money laundering amounting to N6 billion.

The charges against Mompha include conspiracy and money laundering involving proceeds of unlawful activities.

He was also accused of retention of proceeds of criminal conduct, use of property derived from an unlawful act, and failure to disclose assets.

On June 10, 2022, the EFCC informed the court that Mompha was in possession of another passport aside the one submitted to the court as part of his bail conditions.

The prosecution also told the court that the defendant used the other passport in his possession to travel from Ghana to Dubai on 11 April 2022 via Emirates Airlines in violation of the court order.

The EFCC therefore urged the court to revoke bail earlier granted him, and also to issue a bench warrant and declare him wanted. The requests were granted by the court.

Following to the above, the judge on September 2022, ordered Mompha’s trial in absentia, months after revoking his bail for failing to appear in court to face his trial.

At the resumed hearing of the matter on Wednesday, which was for the cross-examination of the witness, Sulaiman I. Sulaiman appeared for the EFCC, while the dou of Kolawole Salami and Ademola Adefolaju announced their appearance for Mompha.

The witness, Olayinka Jimoh, a.k.a. Nappy, while being cross-examined through virtual by Mompha’s lead counsel, Kolawole Salami, told the court that all he said against the first defendant was because of what he was allegedly told the first defendant said by the efcc official. 

The witness also confirmed to court that that the first defendant is into Bureau DE Change operator, while also stated that the plea deal he entered with efcc was not before a court of law.

The witness further confirmed that the first defendant did not know the identity of the third parties he represented and that the first defendant never had any communication with the said third parties. Adding that these third parties were never charged before any court of law in relation to these offences/allegations.

Nappy, also confirmed under cross examination that the amount and the date of the transactions as contained in the counts were not in his account statement (exhibit P1) before the court.

Meanwhile, further hearing of the matter has been adjourned to May 20, 2024.

editor

See author's posts