Connect with us

News

BDC operator admits owing $90,000 to Chinese accused of money laundering, exonerates Nigerian for dealing in Crypto Currency transaction

Published

on

In set above are two learned senior advocates of Nigeria, SANs: Mr. Edwin Anikwem, (left) counsel to Genting International Company Limited, (the 4th defendant), and Mr. Clement Onwuenwunor, counsel to the second defendant, Engr. Friday Audu…….. after the court session on Tuesday, July 8, 2025 at the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos.

By Ibeawuchi Uwaleke, (Advocatenewsng.com), 09064186047.

A Bureau De Change operator and the second prosecution witness procured by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Mr. Alhassan Garba in the N3.4 billion money laundering charge preferred against two Chinese and a Nigerian, admitted on Tuesday July 8, 2025 that he is still owing $90,000 USD to Mr. Huang Haoyu, (Aka Ken), one of the two Chinese standing trial at a Federal High Court, Ikoyi Lagos.

The witness equally exonerated the Nigerian charged along with the Chinese, Engineer Friday Audu for being part of the WhatsApp group he was relating with in the transaction of USDTN Crypto Currency Wallet from where he made several transfers to a company, Genting International Company Limited, also accused in the money laundering case.

Mr. Garba was led in evidence by counsel to Audu, Mr. Clement Onwuenwunor, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN who took on the witness in a cross examination to ascertain how he knew Audu and how his client, the second defendant, was robed in a case of dealing in Crypto Currency Wallet transaction he knew nothing about.

When Mr. Onwuenwunor SAN, asked Alhassan whether he still stands by the statement he made to EFCC implicating Audu as the person who told him what to say at EFCC and what not to say, as well as introducing him to one Mr. Sen, a Chinese, who is now at large, he claimed that he still stands by his statement, but however affirmed that Audu was not one of the people who he was dealing with in Crypto Currency transaction and also said it was not Audu that introduced him to Mr. Sen.

He gave the name of the person who was sending him the Dollars he was changing into Naira and transferring to Genting International Company Limited bank account with Union Bank as Huang Haoyu, Aka, Ken, the first defendant in the suit. He equally now accepted, under further cross examination, that it was not Friday Audu, the second defendant, who introduced him to Mr. Sen, but instead it was Mr. Ken who he had personal contact with.

When the learned Silk put it to him that all the statements he made to EFCC were all lies as he was now contradicting himself from the statements after he requested the Registrar of the court to bring the statements from the court’s record and showed them to the witness, he stammered the answer in response and claimed that what he was saying was the truth.

Under further cross examination on how he knew Mr. Sen whom he has been doing business with for quite some time, he denied knowing Sen, but admitted that it was only in August 2024 that he transacted business in Crypto Currency with Mr. Sen, adding that all other times it was Mr. Ken who transacted business with him in Dollars.

On the $90,000 USD he is still owing Mr. Ken, one of the accused persons, and why he did not state the amount in his statement to EFCC, as he was pressured by counsel to Audu, Mr. Clement Onwuenwunor, SAN, Alhassan said he did not remember to include the amount in his statement, but admitted that the $90,000 USD was the exact amount which got stuck in transmission during the transaction, which he agreed till date, has not been reversed.

When asked further by Onwuenwunor SAN, whether the WhatsApp group he was transacting USDTN with, Audu was a member of the group, Mr. Garba answered emphatically no, adding that the second accused was not part of the Dollar transactions, but was aware when the Naira equivalent was transferred to the Genting International Company Limited bank account, a company he facilitated its registration for Ken with the Corporate Affairs Commission, CAC, as sports betting concern.

Asked whether his business in dealing in Crypto Currency and in Dollar exchange transactions is genuine and registered with the relevant authorities, Alhassan said: “I work with Hugo Vice Bureau De Change as a staff, I am not the owner. I have been in the business for over 10 years now.

“Our Bureau De Change is registered to transact business in foreign exchange and we have the certificate. We also have Schmo certificates to deal in Crypto digital currency. All the certificates are still valid. All these certificates we also submitted to EFCC when we were requested to present them there.”

On the transfer that was made on September 4, 2024, of a certain amount to Genting International Company account, Alhassan claimed that he was not the one that made the transfer, adding that the Crypto Wallet Account he used to receive the Dollar transfers or made transfers with did not belong to him, but to one Jonathan Ifesinachi.

Mr. Edwin Anikwem, SAN, counsel to the company, Genting International company Limited, stepped in immediately after Mr. Onwuenwunor SAN concluded his cross examination on behalf of the second defendant, and after reviewing the whole charge on the money laundering case, asked Alhassan whether all the Dollars he received from the Crypto Currency Wallet account and converted into Naira equivalent which he transferred into Genting company account was reported one way or the other as an illegal money or money laundered into Genting International Company account as being alleged by the prosecution. His answer was an emphatically ‘no’. “There was no such thing, and all the money I converted and transferred into Genting account are not illegal money, that I know”.

The cross examination on Alhassan Garba continues on Thursday, July 17, 2025 when the court sitting before Justice Daniel Osiagor of the Federal High Court, Lagos division adjourned the matter to give opportunity to Mr. Adeniyi Joshua, counsel to the third defendant, Mr. An Hongxa, a Chinese, who was not in court at the last adjourned date, to take his turn to cross examine the second prosecution witness.

At the court on Tuesday, July 8, 2025 also was Mr. Emeka Okpoko, SAN, counsel to the first defendant, Mr. Haoyu, a Chinese, leading another senior lawyer, Mr. Nnaemeka Amaechina and they took their turn to cross examine the second prosecution witness, Alhassan on July 1, 2025.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Stakeholders, Staff Benefit from NDPHC’s Procurement Training Initiative

Published

on

The Niger Delta Power Holding Company (NDPHC) has reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, accountability, and efficiency in project delivery by hosting a high-level refresher and sensitization training for its management team, staff, and stakeholders.Organized by the Human Resources Department at the company’s headquarters, the programme was designed to strengthen institutional capacity, refresh knowledge, and promote greater effectiveness in the discharge of responsibilities.The training was anchored on the theme “Operationalizing by Way of Experimenting the Procurement Processes While Navigating the Pre-Bidding Stage Through to Post Bidding”, and facilitated by DEVD Integrated Project Ltd. Discussions focused on procurement processes, emphasizing due process, compliance, and optimization in power sector project execution.Participants were guided through the critical stages of procurement, from pre-bidding to post-bidding, with facilitators stressing the importance of adherence to established procedures. The session also provided a platform for robust engagement on stakeholder collaboration, highlighting how effective partnerships can drive efficiency and accountability in project delivery.The initiative enjoyed strong backing from the NDPHC Executive Management (EXCO), led by Engr. Jennifer Adighije, FNSE, FINEEE, Managing Director/CEO. She was joined by her team: Engr. Bello Babayo Bello, FNSE, FINEEE, Executive Director (Networks); Engr. Abdullahi Kassim, Executive Director (Generation); Hon. Dr. Steven Andzenge, Executive Director (Legal Services); Hon. Chukwuma Umeoji, Executive Director (Corporate Services); Hon. Omololu Agoro, Executive Director (Finance & Accounts); and Hon. Patrick Obahiagbon, Executive Director (Strategy and Commercial). Their collective presence underscored the importance of the training to the company’s strategic vision and operational goals.Facilitators encouraged participants to apply the knowledge gained to improve operational efficiency and foster stronger collaboration across departments and with external stakeholders. They noted that the lessons learned would help strengthen the company’s institutional framework and ensure that projects are delivered in line with global best practices.The event brought together management staff and other relevant stakeholders, creating an opportunity to exchange ideas and refresh their understanding of procurement processes. It also reinforced NDPHC’s commitment to professional development, transparency, and accountability in its operations.By investing in capacity-building programmes such as this, NDPHC continues to demonstrate its resolve to enhance professional standards and institutional effectiveness. The company emphasized that the training reflects its broader vision of building a stronger, more accountable institution capable of delivering sustainable power solutions to Nigeria.The sensitization exercise forms part of NDPHC’s ongoing efforts to ensure that its workforce remains equipped with the skills and knowledge required to meet the demands of the power sector. It underscores the company’s belief that continuous learning and adherence to due process are essential for achieving its corporate objectives and delivering value to stakeholders.

Continue Reading

News

Hon. Jafaru Yakubu Commends President Tinubu’s Approval of Mutum Biyu–Garba Chede Road Reconstruction

Published

on

Hon. Jafaru Yakubu, Member of the House of Representatives and Chairman, House Committee on Nigeria–China Friendship Group, has commended President Bola Ahmed Tinubu GCFR for granting approval for the urgent rehabilitation and total reconstruction of the Mutum Biyu–Garba Chede Road, a 48km stretch in Taraba State.

Yakubu, who sponsored the motion in the House of Representatives calling for immediate intervention on the road, said the President’s approval is a bold and strategic response to the plight of commuters and communities along the corridor. He explained that the motion, which was debated and adopted by the House, underscored the dangers of continued neglect, including accidents, economic disruption, and the risk of total collapse.

He further acknowledged the National Security Adviser (NSA) Mallam Nuhu Ribadu for adopting a non-kinetic approach in addressing the crisis. According to Yakubu, the NSA’s intervention elevated the urgency of the project, treating infrastructure development as a vital instrument of peace, security, and stability. By drawing national attention to the road’s deterioration, the NSA highlighted the grave risks posed to lives, trade, agriculture, and access to healthcare.

The Mutum Biyu–Garba Chede Road, constructed in the early 1980s, has deteriorated severely due to age and lack of maintenance. With the collapse of the Namnai Bridge along the Jalingo–Wukari highway, the road became the sole alternative route for heavy-duty trucks, worsening its condition and exposing communities to untold hardship.

Hon. Yakubu assured his constituents that he will continue to work closely with the Federal Ministry of Works, FERMA, and the North East Development Commission to ensure the project’s swift execution. He emphasized that the House Committee on Works has already been mandated to conduct oversight and report back within four weeks, a step he believes will guarantee transparency and accountability in the delivery of the project.

“As Chairman of the Nigeria–China Friendship Group, I am deeply conscious of the importance of strategic partnerships in advancing national development. This reconstruction is not merely about infrastructure—it is about saving lives, strengthening commerce, and reaffirming government’s duty to serve its people. On behalf of my constituency, I extend profound gratitude to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu GCFR and the NSA for their steadfast commitment,” Yakubu declared.

The approval of this project, following Yakubu’s sponsored motion, is widely seen as a demonstration of leadership that listens and acts decisively. For communities in Mutum Biyu, Garba Chede, and adjoining areas, the reconstruction represents hope for safer travel, renewed economic activity, and restored dignity after years of neglect.

Analysts note that the development is not just about fixing a road but about reconnecting people, boosting agriculture, and reinforcing national cohesion at a time when infrastructure remains central to Nigeria’s growth agenda.

Continue Reading

News

BUDGET OFFICE OF THE FEDERATIONRESPONSE TO THE 2026 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE FISCAL TRANSPARENCY REPORT ON NIGERIA

Published

on

  1. Introduction
    The Budget Office of the Federation (BOF) notes the observations on Nigeria contained in the 2026 Fiscal Transparency Report of the United States Department of State. The Federal Government welcomes objective assessments of its public financial management system and remains committed to the continuous improvement of fiscal transparency, accountability and access to public finance information.
    The Report acknowledges important areas in which Nigeria meets fiscal transparency requirements, including the public availability of the enacted budget and end-of-year fiscal information; the disclosure of debt obligations, including major state-owned enterprise debt; the legal and disclosure framework governing the sovereign wealth fund; and the existence and application of statutory procedures governing natural-resource extraction contracts and licences.
    Other observations in the Report require clarification when considered in the context of Nigeria’s institutional allocation of responsibilities and the range of budgetary and fiscal information already in the public domain. The purpose of this response is therefore not to dispute the value of external scrutiny, but to ensure that the factual record and the structure of Nigeria’s fiscal system are properly understood.
  2. Mandate of the Budget Office of the Federation
    The BOF is responsible for coordinating the preparation and consolidation of the Federal Government’s budget, and for monitoring and reporting on its implementation within the framework established by law and government fiscal policy.
    Its responsibilities include coordinating the preparation of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and Fiscal Strategy Paper (MTEF/FSP); issuing Budget Call Circulars; coordinating the preparation of Medium-Term Sector Strategies; coordinating the preparation and consolidation of the Executive Budget Proposal; supporting the appropriation process; monitoring budget implementation; and producing periodic Budget Implementation Reports.
    These responsibilities form part of a wider public financial management system in which different institutions perform duties assigned to them by the Constitution and by statute. Debt recording and management fall principally within the remit of the Debt Management Office; government accounting, treasury and cash-management functions reside principally in the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation; external audit is constitutionally assigned to the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation; while federal procurement operates within the statutory framework administered by the Bureau of Public Procurement and individual procuring entities.
    The observations in the Report are therefore best considered in the context of this institutional division of responsibility. Fiscal transparency is the product of an interconnected system; no single institution produces or controls every category of information on which an assessment of the entire system must depend.
  3. Publication and Accessibility of Budget Information
    The Report recommends that Nigeria make its Executive Budget Proposal widely and easily accessible to the public, including online. The BOF respectfully notes that the online publication of the Executive Budget Proposal and other major budget documents has, for several years, formed part of the Federal Government’s established budget process.
    The BOF routinely publishes major documents produced at successive stages of the fiscal cycle. These include the MTEF/FSP, the Executive Budget Proposal and detailed estimates, Appropriation Acts, implementation guidelines, and periodic Budget Implementation Reports.
    For example, the 2025 Executive Budget Proposal was published on the BOF website on 18 December 2024 alongside the 2025 Appropriation Bill. The 2026-2028 MTEF/FSP was similarly published, while the 2026 Appropriation Bill and its detailed estimates were placed on the BOF website on 8 January 2026.
    The purpose of continuing reform, therefore, is not to create a practice of publication where none exists, but to make an established practice more timely, systematic and easier for users to navigate. Fiscal information is useful not merely because it exists, but because it is published at the appropriate time, clearly identified and readily connected to the other documents needed to understand the fiscal picture.
    Following presidential assent to an Appropriation Act, the signed instrument is subjected to validation and line-by-line reconciliation against the version passed by the National Assembly before the final budget details are reflected on the Government’s financial management platform and released for public use. This process is intended to ensure that the figures, codes and statutory references placed before the public correspond with the instrument that has become law.
    For the 2026 Appropriation Act, this process took longer than would ordinarily be desirable. The Budget Office considered it preferable to complete the necessary validation before publication rather than place in the public domain figures that might later require correction. That choice protected the integrity of the published record, but the delay also demonstrates the need to shorten the interval between presidential assent and public availability.
    The lesson is therefore twofold: published fiscal information must be reliable, but that reliability must increasingly be achieved without sacrificing timeliness. The BOF is reviewing its internal sequencing, validation and publication arrangements with that objective in mind.
  4. Completeness of the Presentation of Government Revenues and Expenditures
    The Report recommends that the budget provide a substantially complete picture of government revenues and expenditures. Nigeria’s fiscal framework is expressed through several related documents rather than through a single instrument. The MTEF/FSP establishes the macroeconomic and fiscal assumptions underlying the annual budget. The Executive Budget Proposal, Appropriation Bill and detailed estimates set out proposed expenditure allocations, revenue assumptions and the financing framework. Budget Implementation Reports subsequently show performance against approved benchmarks.
    Taken together, these documents contain extensive information on projected revenues, expenditure proposals, financing and the operations of Government-Owned Enterprises. The budget documentation also provides information on grants, external financing and other material fiscal flows within the Federal Government’s reporting framework.
    Expenditure is presented through institutional and economic classifications, including allocations to ministries, departments and agencies. The Government also publishes detailed estimates relating to the Presidency and other institutions of government, subject always to the legitimate requirements of law, national security and operational confidentiality.
    The BOF therefore considers that an assessment of Nigeria’s fiscal transparency is most complete when it examines the available budget documents as a body, rather than treating any one document as though it were intended to contain the entire fiscal account.
    This does not remove the need for improvement. Citizens, investors and other users of fiscal information should be able to understand the broad relationship among revenue, expenditure, financing and fiscal risks without having to reconstruct the fiscal picture from numerous documents. The Office will therefore continue to improve consolidation, cross-referencing and presentation so that information already disclosed across different fiscal documents can be more readily understood as a coherent whole.
  5. Expenditures Relating to Executive Offices
    The Report recommends a clearer breakdown of expenditures supporting executive offices. The BOF agrees with the transparency objective underlying this recommendation.
    Appropriations to offices and institutions within the Executive are subject to the same constitutional appropriation process that applies to other Federal Government entities. Detailed estimates are already published within the budget documentation. Where expenditures are currently aggregated within broader administrative, personnel or service-wide classifications, there remains scope to improve their presentation without compromising legitimate security, statutory or operational considerations.
    The BOF will accordingly continue to examine the classification and presentation of such expenditures with a view to improving public understanding within the applicable legal and security framework.
  6. Variance Between Budgeted and Actual Revenues and Expenditures
    The Report observes that actual revenues and expenditures did not reasonably correspond with the enacted budget. The BOF considers that this observation would benefit from greater precision regarding the standard against which such correspondence is being assessed.
    An appropriation is an authority to spend; it is not, in every circumstance, a guarantee that the entire amount appropriated will become available in cash. Actual fiscal outcomes depend on realised revenues, oil production and prices, tax collections, exchange rates, financing conditions, cash availability and the timing of expenditure execution. A difference between an approved budget and the eventual outturn must therefore be interpreted rather than merely observed.
    The central transparency question is whether material deviations are identified, explained and reported. This is one of the purposes of the Budget Implementation Reports produced by the BOF, which compare revenue and expenditure performance against approved benchmarks and explain significant departures from the fiscal plan.
    At the same time, persistent or unusually large differences between appropriations and outturns can weaken the usefulness of the budget as an instrument of economic management. The Government’s continuing reforms therefore place greater emphasis on realistic revenue forecasting, improved revenue mobilisation, stronger commitment controls, better cash planning and closer alignment between appropriations and available financing.
  7. Audit Independence and Publication of Audit Reports
    The observations concerning the independence of the Supreme Audit Institution and the publication of audit reports relate principally to the constitutional and statutory mandate of the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation and to the wider legislative framework governing public audit.
    The BOF supports a strong and independent external audit function as an essential component of fiscal accountability. It will continue to provide the budgetary and implementation information required within its mandate and to cooperate with the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation and other oversight institutions.
    Institutional or legislative questions concerning the independence, powers and publication obligations of the Supreme Audit Institution are, however, appropriately addressed in conjunction with the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation, the National Assembly and other authorities responsible for the applicable legal framework.
  8. Public Procurement Information
    Federal procurement is governed by the Public Procurement Act and the institutional framework administered by the Bureau of Public Procurement, while procurement transactions are undertaken by individual procuring entities. The recommendation concerning the publication of accessible information on procurement contracts should therefore be addressed principally through that framework.
    The BOF nevertheless recognises the close relationship among appropriation, procurement, commitment and payment. Greater interoperability among budget, procurement and treasury information systems would materially improve the public’s ability to follow expenditure from appropriation through procurement to eventual payment and delivery. The Office supports the continued development of such integrated public financial management arrangements.
  9. Timeliness, Institutional Capacity and the Fiscal Responsibility Framework
    Fiscal transparency should be treated as a continuing institutional obligation, not as an exercise undertaken solely in response to an external assessment. The experience of producing statutory fiscal reports has, however, brought into sharper focus a question that warrants attention beyond administrative improvement alone.
    Fiscal reports are assembled from numerous sources across government. Their reliability depends on the timely submission of information, reconciliation among institutions, resolution of discrepancies and verification before publication. Where these processes repeatedly require more time than the statutory reporting period permits, the response should not simply be to normalise lateness.
    Government must first improve the processes that can be improved: clearer responsibility for source data, earlier submission, greater automation, greater interoperability among systems and stricter reporting discipline.
    However, where experience over time demonstrates that a statutory deadline no longer reasonably accommodates the number of institutions, datasets and verification steps required to produce a reliable report, there is also a legitimate case for reviewing the law itself.
    The purpose of the Fiscal Responsibility Act is to strengthen fiscal discipline, accountability and transparency. Its reporting provisions should therefore impose deadlines that are demanding enough to compel administrative discipline, but sufficiently realistic to permit the publication of information whose accuracy can be defended.
    The Federal Government should accordingly consider, through the appropriate legislative process, whether aspects of the reporting timetable under the Fiscal Responsibility Act require amendment in the light of experience since its enactment. Such a review should not weaken reporting obligations. Its purpose should be the opposite: to establish timelines that are credible, enforceable and capable of producing reports that are both timely and reliable.
  10. Institutional Engagement and Continuing Improvement
    The Fiscal Transparency Report can also serve as a basis for constructive technical engagement. The BOF considers it useful to deepen dialogue with the United States Government and other development partners on the methodology used in fiscal transparency assessments, particularly the treatment of multiple publicly available fiscal documents, the measurement of budget credibility, and the standards applied to timeliness and accessibility.
    Such engagement should be approached as an opportunity for clarification and institutional learning rather than as a dispute over the assessment. The Office may also explore appropriate technical assistance arrangements to strengthen its capacity in fiscal reporting, information management, digital publication, interoperability and public accessibility. Any such cooperation should complement Nigeria’s own reforms and operate within the Government’s legal, institutional and information-security framework.
  11. Conclusion
    Nigeria accepts the principle at the heart of fiscal transparency: citizens and other stakeholders should be able, without unnecessary difficulty, to know what the Government intends to raise and spend, what the legislature has authorised, what was eventually received and spent, and how public resources were accounted for and audited.
    Nigeria has already built a substantial architecture for making this information public. The question before us is therefore not whether disclosure exists, but how to make the existing system faster, clearer, more complete and easier to understand.
    There are areas in which Government must improve its own processes. There are areas in which fiscal information already exists but must be assembled and presented more coherently. There are responsibilities that belong to institutions other than the Budget Office. There may also now be statutory reporting timelines whose continued practicality deserves examination in the light of experience.
    A mature system should be able to acknowledge all four points without defensiveness.
    The Budget Office therefore welcomes external assessments that assist Nigeria in strengthening its institutions. It also considers it important that such assessments take account of the full range of fiscal documents made publicly available and of the constitutional and statutory division of responsibilities among institutions.
    The Federal Government remains committed to a budget system in which fiscal decisions are not only lawful and disciplined, but are also increasingly transparent, accessible, intelligible and capable of independent public scrutiny.

Tanimu Yakubu
Director-General
Budget Office of the Federation
Abuja
18 August 2026

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.