The trial of Ali Bello, Chief of Staff to the governor of Kogi State, Ahmed Usman Ododo before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Maitama, Abuja continued on Monday, February 16, 2026, with the 17th Prosecution Witness, PW17, Ahmed Audu Abubakar, linking Bello with funds from Kogi State Government.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, is prosecuting Ali Bello, a nephew of former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Adoza Bello, alongside Dauda Sulaiman, on a 16-count amended charge bordering on alleged misappropriation and money laundering to the tune of ₦10,270,556,800.00.
Led in evidence by prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, the witness, an investigator with the EFCC, identified Exhibit F as a document recovered in the course of investigation that contains details of inflows and outflows of funds.
In response to prosecution counsel’s enquiry on $91,000.00 outflow, dated February 5, 2021, the witness disclosed that the amount was paid to “Oga Ali,” a reference to the first defendant, Ali Bello.
On February 6, 2021, the witness identified an outflow of ₦150,000.00, released to “Presido.”
He further explained that “Rashido” referred to one Abdulrasheed, who came from Lokoja to transport money, stating that ₦150 million was moved from Lokoja to the bureau de change operator.
The witness also identified entries, dated February 19, 2021, showing an endorsement of ₦10 million paid to Ali Bello and ₦500,000.00 to Daud. He clarified that “Alhaji Ali” also refers to the first defendant, while “Daud” refers to the second defendant, Dauda Sulaiman.
On investigation findings relating to account number 1000688500 belonging to Dantata and Sawoe Construction Company, with transfers of ₦80 million and ₦20 million, the witness testified that the payments were for Plot 1060, located in Gwarimpa,Abuja, made by the company. The ₦100 million total he said, was paid to Dantata and Sawoe and reflected in Exhibit F.
“There were 10 entries of ₦10 million each, making a total of ₦100 million. The source is Maigari Murtala, an ally of the first defendant and a contact with the Bureau de Change operator,” he said.
The irrevocable power of attorney for the said property was subsequently tendered in evidence by the prosecution, marked Exhibit Q.
The prosecution counsel’s attempt to tender the extra-judicial statements of the defendants, dated November 29, 30; December 1, 10, 11 and 12, 2022 for the first defendant, and November 30 and December 1, 2022 for the second defendant was objected to by counsel to the first and second defendants on the alleged ground that their admissibility did not comply with Section 15(4) and Section 17(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA, particularly with regards to the voluntariness of audio-visual recording of statements.
After listening to arguments from both sides, Justice Omotosho ruled for immediate commencement of trial-within-trial to determine the voluntariness of the statements, with PW17 testifying as the first prosecution witness in the sub-trial.
In his testimony, the witness identified the statements of the defendants and affirmed that they were voluntarily made.
“In EFCC, we have a standard. No threats, no promises, and statements were taken in the presence of their counsel, with Z.E. Abbas being the most present,” he said.
Following the proceedings in the sub-trial, the statements were admitted in evidence, as there was no further objection from counsel.
Counsel to the first and second defendants cross-examined the witness. With the exhaustion of their cross-examination, Justice Omotosho discharged the witness from the witness box and adjourned the matter till February 17, 2026, for continuation of trial.
Reps In Rowdy Session Over Motion To Rescind ‘Real-Time’ Clause In Electoral Act
The House of Representatives was in a rowdy session on Tuesday as lawmakers disagreed over a motion seeking to rescind the passage of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, which contained real-time electronic transmission of results.
The Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Rules and Business, Francis Waive, had moved a motion for the House to rescind its decision on the bill, which was passed on December 23, in line with the Senate’s position on real-time electronic transmission of election results.
When the Speaker of the House, Tajudeen Abbas, put the motion to a voice vote, the “nays” were louder than the “ayes”, but he ruled that the ayes had it.
The ruling triggered protests from lawmakers, who began shouting in objection, prompting the speaker to call for an executive session.
When the House of Representatives passed the Electoral Act in December 2025, it adopted the compulsory real-time transmission of election results to IReV.
The clause it approved said, “presiding officer shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the IReV portal in real time, and such transmission shall be done after the prescribed form EC8A has been signed and stamped by the presiding officer and/or countersigned by the candidates or polling unit agents, where available at the polling unit”.
However, when the Red Chamber passed its version of the bill, the senators rejected the proposal for the real-time transmission of election results.
The move drew backlash and protests with calls on the senators to rescind the decision. Last Tuesday, the Senate reversed its earlier stance and approved the electronic transmission of election results to IReV. But it added a manual collation option in case of technological failure.
Both the Senate and House of Representatives set up a joint conference committee to harmonise the versions of the bills passed by the upper and lower chambers.
Opposition parties are asking the National Assembly to adopt the House of Representatives version, which includes the “real-time” clause.