A witness for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) informed an FCT high court in Apo, Abuja, on Thursday that there was no direct presidential instruction given to Olu Agunloye, former minister of power and steel, to award the Mambilla hydroelectric power station contract.
Agunloye is currently facing an amended seven-count charge before Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie, which includes allegations of disobedience to presidential directives, gratification, and forgery.
The EFCC alleges that on May 22, 2003, the former minister went against a supposed directive from the federal executive council (FEC) meeting held on May 21, 2003, by approving a contract with Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited (SPTCL) for the development of the 3,960 MW Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Station.
The commission further claims that Agunloye received N5.2 million as gratification from SPTCL and its promoter, Leno Adesanya, through an intermediary named Jide Abiodun Sotinrin.
Testifying as the third prosecution witness (PW3), Assistant Commissioner of Police Umar Babangida stated that the EFCC’s probe into the Mambilla contract led to the charges filed against the ex-minister.
During cross-examination by defence counsel Adeola Adedipe, Babangida confirmed that the first count in the charge relates to alleged disobedience to a presidential directive.
“The defendant disobeyed the directive of the then President Olusegun Obasanjo and the resolution of the Federal Executive Council meeting of May 21, 2003,” he said.
However, when pressed to identify the exact directive within the minutes of that FEC session—submitted as “Exhibit EFCC 3(d)”—the witness admitted that the document did not contain any specific presidential directive.
Babangida maintained that he still recommended charges against Agunloye for abuse of office, pointing to his alleged association with Adesanya, the promoter of SPTCL.
He told the court that Agunloye initially did not mention any prior relationship with Adesanya when questioned by the EFCC but later stated in a written submission that their first contact was in 2014—11 years after he left public office—and that their main dealings started in 2018.
When Adedipe requested that Babangida read the relevant section of Agunloye’s written statement already in evidence, prosecution counsel Abba Mohammed objected on the grounds that the witness could not be cross-examined on a document he did not personally author.
The defence argued that the witness had relied on the document in his investigation and testimony, and that cross-examination on it was necessary to test his credibility.
Justice Onwuegbuzie dismissed the objection and instructed the witness to read the indicated portion, which confirmed Agunloye’s position that he had no prior contact with Adesanya until 2014.
The hearing was subsequently adjourned to November 3 for the continuation of the cross-examination of the third prosecution witness.