The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has said it is reviewing the acquittal of former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Bello Adoke, by a Federal Capital Territory High Court in the Malau OPL 245 fraud case.
This comes after the anti-graft agency denied reports that it accused parties involved in the trial of bribing its prosecutor, Offem Uket, to bungle the case.
The EFCC had arraigned Adoke on January 15, 2020, along with Aliyu Abubakar, Gbinije of Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, Nigeria Agip Exploration Limited, Shell Ultra Deep Nigeria Limited, and Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company Limited.
Adoke was accused of collecting a gratification of N300 million from Abubakar over the OPL 245 resolution.
Ruling on the no-case submission filed by Adoke, the trial judge, Abubakar Kutigi, dismissed the charges against the former AGF, adding that the EFCC failed to prove its charges of fraud, bribery, and money laundering.
He also berated the EFCC for wasting four years on a trial without providing evidence.
A statement on Friday by the commission’s Head of Media and Publicity, Dele Oyewale, noted that the EFCC is reviewing the development.
The statement read, “EFCC has commenced a review of developments around the Malabu OPL 245 fraud case, including the dismissal of the charges against a former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Bello Adoke, by a Federal Capital Territory High Court, Abuja and the conduct of the prosecuting counsel, Offem Uket.
“The review will entail an exploration of the option of appeal and possible change of counsel in view of the commission’s dissatisfaction with the handling of the case by Uket. ”
Oyewale, however, noted that the review had nothing to do with the speculations that its prosecutor intentionally bungled the case.
He said, “Nevertheless, this intention has no nexus whatsoever to the spew of speculations imputing compromise by parties to the charge, currently making the rounds in some sections of the media.
“EFCC is not obliged to embrace such narratives as it neither accused any of the parties of any unsavoury conduct nor made any conclusive statements about any investigation on the matter.
“The public is enjoined to ignore effusions of mischief makers on the matter and await the next course of actions.”
