A prosecution witness in the alleged N8.7bn money laundering trial of former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), on Wednesday told the Federal High Court in Abuja that Zenith Bank filed suspicious transaction reports on transactions linked to the ex-minister’s accounts.
- +Bank flagged ex-AGF Malami’s transactions, witness tells court
A compliance officer with the bank, Mashelia Arhyel Bata, disclosed this while testifying before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja.
A compliance officer with the bank, Mashelia Arhyel Bata, disclosed this while testifying before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja.
Malami is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission alongside his wife, Hajia Bashir Asabe, and his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, on an amended 16-count charge bordering on conspiracy, concealment and laundering of alleged proceeds of unlawful activities amounting to N8,713,923,759.49.
Under cross-examination by defence counsel, Adebayo Adedeji (SAN), the witness admitted that the deposits in the account statements complied with the guidelines of the Central Bank of Nigeria.
He, however, added, “But we had to file a Suspicious Transaction Report. We did file.”
Drama briefly unfolded during re-examination when prosecution counsel, J.S. Okutepa (SAN), asked the witness to explain what constituted a suspicious transaction report.
The defence objected, insisting there was no ambiguity in the testimony that required clarification.
But Justice Abdulmalik overruled the objection after the prosecution relied on Section 215(3) of the Evidence Act to justify the question.
Explaining further, the witness told the court, “Any deposition of funds seen in a pattern or repetitive, you must escalate it to the NFIU.”
The Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit is responsible for analysing and disseminating financial intelligence relating to money laundering and terrorism financing.
The witness also clarified that his role as a compliance officer involved receiving correspondence from law enforcement agencies, stressing that he was neither the account officer nor the relationship manager for the accounts under investigation.
After the testimony, the court discharged the witness and adjourned the matter to May 22 for continuation of the trial.
