In the ongoing trial of former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor Mr. Godwin Emefiele, Chinedu Eneanya, a witness for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), accused commercial banks on Tuesday of causing the shortage that greeted the federal government’s Naira redesign policy in late 2022 and early 2023.
Under cross-examination by Mr. Olalekan Ojo, SAN, Emefiele’s attorney, the witness—a Commission investigator—made the revelation.
The former CBN governor is on trial for four counts that include revamping the Naira without the Board of the CBN’s and the Committee of Governors’ (COG) approval, as well as failing to obtain the consent of the late President Muhammadu Buhari.
The anti-graft agency claimed in the lawsuit, FTC/HC/CR/264/2024, that Emefiele violated Section 19 of the CBN Act between October 19, 2022, and March 5, 2023, by permitting the printing of 375,520,000 pieces of color-swapped N1,000 notes at a total cost of N11,052,068,062 without the CBN Board’s recommendation and the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria’s strict approval, causing harm to the public.
The indictment states that the offense was penalized under Section 123 of the Penal Code, Cap 89 Laws of the Federation, 1990.
However, the defendant had refuted the accusation.
During his Evidence-in-Chief, the witness had tendered video evidence claiming that the redesign of the Naira notes by the Emefiele-led CBN brought untold hardship for many Nigerians.
Eneanya, the leader of the Inter Ministerial Probe Panel and the seventh prosecution witness (PW7), disclosed claimed violations by certain commercial banks in the nation throughout the policy’s implementation in 2022–2023, however, during cross-examination on Tuesday.
However, he said he couldn’t remember how many banks had bank officials hoarding currency.
“Can you confirm to the Honourable Court that bank officials were hoarding mints?” was the question posed to him.
He answered, “I know that, but I can’t be specific.”
Additionally, the witness was unable to establish whether the anti-graft agency had detained bank personnel who were supposedly in charge of stockpiling the cash.
In response to the inquiry, A.O. Mohammed, the prosecution’s attorney, said, “His beat was specific; whether his (naira redesign) was a valid approval.”
But Emefiele’s attorney retorted that the witness had the authority to make an arrest as an investigative officer and was not restricted to his evidence in chief.
Since the anti-graft agency claims that Emefiele caused Nigerians undue hardship because of the shortage of the redesigned coins, Ojo emphasized that the question was also essential.
In response, the judge asked the witness to respond to the question after verifying his designation.
Eneanya responded, “I told this court that the EFCC established a task force; I didn’t say it was my team.” He also said he didn’t know what the EFCC did to the bank officials that resulted in the alleged violations.
In the meantime, the witness said he was “not privy to that information” when asked to confirm under what authorization they visited the nation’s commercial banks.
In response, the defendant’s attorney asked for an adjournment and to be provided with all case-related documents.
In a brief decision, Justice Maryanne Anenih postponed the witness’s cross-examination until March 19.
The witness said earlier in the day’s proceedings that Ahmed Halilu, the Managing Director (MD) of Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Plc (NSPM), had given the EFCC team access to the email exchange between De La Rue and himself.
“The NMPS MD provided my team with access to the email, and it was then opened in front of the team,” he stated.
He acknowledged that he was unable to remember every statement Halilu had written.
Ojo requested the statements as a result.
When questioned about whether the NSPM had ever created naira notes, he replied that he “could not remember.”
Additionally, the witness was unable to remember how many different currencies commercial banks had access to.
He asked to be permitted to review the documents in order to jog his recollection.
“We have a team that went nationwide in conjunction with other law enforcement agencies, taking stock and ensuring that those currencies were made available in public,” he added when asked if the EFCC team contacted the commercial banks to verify the precise sums sent to them.
He added that the group maintained a log of the inventory of the resources made accessible to commercial banks.
Ojo also requested that the defense be given access to the information.
The witness said he “was not there in all the teams” when asked if the EFCC also examined bank vaults.
Fifteen minutes prior to the start of the day’s hearings, Emefiele’s attorney told the court that they had only received the Investigative Report that the defense had requested at the previous hearing.
“The decision to produce the Investigative Report was not made to deprive the defendant and his counsel of the opportunity to ask for the said document,” the EFCC attorney countered.
He noted that the witness was asked to produce the document in court, which he complied with.
Hon. Dr. Philip “Okanga” Agbese, a transformative leader in Enone. Discover his achievements, community projects, and vision for 2027
