Claims and counterclaims erupted at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, as EFCC witness admitted that investigators did not interview Katsina State land officials over the availability of land for an airport contract involving former Aviation Minister, Senator Hadi Abubakar Sirika. The admission came as the defence alluded that the state ministry provided land for the project and communicated this to the EFCC, raising questions about the scope of the investigation.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) 12th prosecution witness (PW12), Christopher Odofin admitted he would be surprised if the ministry had provided land for the project and informed the EFCC. His testimony raises questions about the scope of the investigation into the contract awarded to Al-Buraq Global Investment Limited.
The defence also questioned the investigator about an alleged dispute between the Nigerian Air Force (NAF) and the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) over the project site. Odofin said he was unaware of the dispute and confirmed that investigators did not interview personnel from either agency.
Questions over why key signatories to the Katsina Airport project approval were not called to testify sparked fresh courtroom drama, as the defence revived the issue and the prosecution raised an objection.
Recall that on October 20, the defence questioned the absence of Abel Enitan, now Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, who was Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Aviation and chairman of the ministry’s Ministerial Tenders Board when the contract was awarded.
EFCC Witness: Investigation and documentary evidence before the court
During cross-examination, counsel to Al-Buraq, Michael Numa, SAN, asked Odofin whether EFCC investigators interviewed officials of the Katsina State Ministry of Lands during their investigation.
The witness answered in the negative, insisting that there was no land for the execution of the project. He also said he would be surprised if the ministry had provided land and communicated that information to the EFCC.
“We never interviewed personnel of the Katsina State Ministry of Lands. We also did not interview personnel of the Air Force and FAAN,” Odofin told the court.
The defence alluded to a document reportedly obtained from the Katsina State Ministry of Lands indicating that land was available for the project. Numa’s questions challenged the investigator’s knowledge of the document and whether investigators had sufficiently examined the agencies and officials connected to the site.
Odofin also said he did not know whether the land was being used by the Air Force. He was equally unaware that the military had sent a document about the matter to the commission.
EFCC Witness unaware of NAF-FAAN land dispute
Numa also questioned the EFCC witness about an alleged disagreement between the Nigerian Air Force and FAAN over the proposed project site. The defence sought to establish whether the dispute had prevented Al-Buraq from mobilising to commence work.
Odofin said he was unaware of any dispute between the two agencies. He also said he did not know whether the disagreement had prevented the company from accessing the site or whether the contract had subsequently been re-awarded to Al-Buraq with instructions to begin work.
“I am not aware of a dispute between Air Force and FAAN over the land. I also do not know that the dispute prevented Al-Buraq to move to site. Also, I don’t know if the contract was re-awarded to Al-Buraq and it was asked to move to site,” he said.
The EFCC witness confirmed that investigators had not interviewed personnel of either agency. The defence’s questions therefore focused on whether the investigation adequately examined the circumstances surrounding the project site and the availability of land for construction.
EFCC investigation: Witness maintains probe was thorough
Despite acknowledging that investigators did not interview officials of the Katsina State Ministry of Lands, NAF or FAAN, Odofin maintained that the EFCC investigation was thorough.
“To the best of my ability, the investigation was thorough. Also, to the best of my ability, all relevant documents were gathered. All materials submitted to me are in the proof of evidence,” he told the court.
The EFCC witness said investigators interviewed the then Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Aviation, Abel Enitan; the ministry’s Director of Procurement, Musa Odiniya; and Azubuike Okorie, who testified as the first prosecution witness.
However, Odofin confirmed that investigators did not make video recordings of the statements obtained from those officials.
The defence also questioned the investigator about the approval process for the Katsina Airport contracts and the relationship between the terminal-building project and the apron-expansion work.
Although shown documents relating to the projects, Odofin maintained that the terminal-building and apron-expansion contracts constituted one project. He nevertheless confirmed that the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) had approved the contracts.
Defence challenges evidence linking Sirika to contract award
The cross-examination also examined the evidence linking former Aviation Minister, Senator Hadi Abubakar Sirika, to the award of the contract to Al-Buraq.
Odofin maintained that Sirika influenced the contract award. However, Numa questioned aspects of the documentary record and the information available to investigators concerning the project.
The defence also examined the roles of ministry officials in the procurement process and the circumstances surrounding the contract and project site.
The EFCC witness told the court that the Ministry of Aviation had no affiliations with Fatima Sirika and Hamman Jalal Sule, the second and third defendants. He said the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, where the two defendants worked, had no authority over the Ministry of Aviation.
The EFCC witness further confirmed that Al-Buraq had other shareholders and directors apart from Fatima and Sule. However, none of those individuals was being prosecuted in the case.
Sirika is standing trial alongside his daughter, Fatima, his son-in-law, Hamman Jalal Sule, and Al-Buraq Global Investment Limited over allegations relating to the award of an airport contract. The defendants have pleaded not guilty.
Justice Sylvanus Oriji adjourned the case to November 18 for continuation of Odofin’s cross-examination.
