Chinedu Eneanya, a witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in the ongoing trial of former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Mr. Godwin Emefiele, Tuesday indicted commercial banks for the scarcity that greeted the Naira redesign policy of the federal government in late 2022 and early 2023.
The witness, who is an investigator of the Commission, made the disclosure under cross-examination by Emefiele’s lawyer, Mr. Olalekan Ojo, SAN.
The former CBN Governor is standing trial on a four-count charge bordering on redesigning the Naira without recommendation from the Board of the CBN, Committee of Governors (COG) of the CBN as well as not getting the approval of then President, Late Muhammadu Buhari.
In the suit marked: FTC/HC/CR/264/2024, the anti-graft agency claimed amongst others that Emefiele between October 19, 2022 and March 5, 2023 disobeyed the direction of Section 19 of CBN Act, by approving the printing of 375,520,000 pieces of colourswapped N1,000 notes at a total cost of N11,052,068,062 without the recommendation of the CBN Board and strict approval of the President, Federal Republic of Nigeria, which caused injury to the public.
According to the charge, the offence contravened Section 123 of the Penal Code, Cap 89 Laws of the Federation, 1990 and punishable under the same law.
The defendant, had however, denied the charge.
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.
However, under cross-examination Tuesday, Eneanya, who is the seventh prosecution witness (PW7), and head of the Inter Ministerial Probe Panel, revealed alleged infractions by some commercial banks in the country during the commencement of the policy in 2022/2023.
But he claimed not have been able to recall the total number of banks where bank officials hoarded currencies.
He was asked, “Can you confirm to the Honourable Court that bank officials were hoarding mints?”
“I am aware of that, but I cannot be specific”, he replied.
Also, when asked if the anti-graft agency arrested bank officials allegedly responsible for the hoarding of the currencies, the witness could not confirm.
Prosecution lawyer, A.O Mohammed, had objected to the question, stating that, “His beat was specific; whether his (naira redesign) was a valid approval.”
But Emefiele’s lawyer countered, pointing out that the witness was not limited to his evidence in chief and, as an investigative officer, had the power to make an arrest.
Ojo stressed that the question was also necessary since the anti-graft agency alleges that Emefiele caused undue hardship to Nigerians due to the shortage of the redesigned currencies.
Reacting, the judge after confirming the witness’s designation, asked him to answer the question.
“I stated before this court that the EFCC raised a task force; I didn’t say it was my team,” Eneanya answered, adding that he was not aware of what the EFCC did to the bank officials that caused the alleged infractions.
Meanwhile, when the witness was asked to confirm on whose authority they visited commercial banks in the country, he said he was “not privy to that information.”
Responding, defendant’s counsel then requested to be given all documents related to the case and asked for an adjournment.
In a short ruling, Justice Maryanne Anenih adjourned to March 19 for the continuation of the cross-examination of the witness.
Earlier during the day’s proceeding the witness stated that the Managing Director (MD) of Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Plc (NSPM), Ahmed Halilu, disclosed the email communication between De La Rue and himself to the EFCC team.
“The email was made available to my team by the MD of NMPS, and subsequently, the email was opened in front of the team,” he said.
READ ALSO:Oil Holds Steady As US–Iran Tensions Provide Support
He admitted that Halilu had written a series of statements but could not recall them all.
This prompted Ojo to request the statements.
When asked if the NSPM had ever designed naira notes at any point in time, he said he “could not remember.”
The witness also could not recall the quantity of currencies available to commercial banks.
He requested that he be allowed to check the records to refresh his memory.
When questioned if the EFCC team reached out to the commercial banks to confirm the specific amounts given to them, he said: “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 also said the team kept a record of the stock-taking exercise regarding what was made available to commercial banks.
Ojo further asked for the records to be produced to the defence.
When asked if banks’ vaults were also checked by the EFCC, the witness said he, “was not there in all the teams.”
At the beginning of the proceedings, Emefiele’s lawyer informed the court that they were only given the Investigative Report that the defence requested at the last hearing, 15 minutes before the day’s proceedings.
However, the EFCC lawyer said, “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.”
He noted that the witness was asked to produce the document in court, which he complied with.
