A KWARA State High Court sitting in Ilorin on Thursday adjourned proceedings in the alleged ₦5.78 billion diversion case involving a former governor of the state, Abdulfatah Ahmed, and his former Commissioner for Finance, Ademola Banu, to February 16, 2026, following a dispute over documentary evidence.
News Point Nigeria reports that the defendants are standing trial before Justice Mahmud Abdulgafar on charges of financial misconduct brought against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), arising from transactions carried out during Ahmed’s tenure as governor.
At the resumed hearing, the sixth prosecution witness, identified as Ujilibo, told the court that the EFCC, during its investigation, obtained bank statements relating to loans allegedly secured by the Kwara State Government to pay teachers’ salaries under the State Universal Basic Education Board (SUBEB).
Led in evidence by EFCC counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), the witness said the commission wrote to several banks requesting statements of accounts connected to SUBEB funds as well as Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) matching grants.
According to him, the requested bank statements were eventually obtained and tendered before the court, where they were admitted as exhibits.
However, proceedings were abruptly stalled following a sharp disagreement between the prosecution and defence over the organisation and authenticity of the documents served on the defence and presented in court.
Counsel to the defendants, Kamaldeen Ajibade (SAN), objected to the tendering of the documents, arguing that those presented before the court differed from what had been served on the defence team.
Ajibade further contended that the documents were neither paginated nor arranged in a logical or chronological order, making it difficult for the defence to adequately respond.
The prosecution counsel, Jacobs, disagreed with the objection, insisting that identical documents had been served on the defence and that it was not the responsibility of the prosecution to organise the documents for the defendants.
The disagreement prompted the court to intervene.
In his ruling, Justice Abdulgafar held that the continuation of the trial would be impracticable under the circumstances and adjourned the matter to allow both parties to properly organise the documents.
The judge said the adjournment became necessary due to the improper arrangement of the documents, stressing that orderly presentation of evidence was essential for a fair trial.
Speaking with journalists after the court session, Ajibade described the development as unacceptable in a criminal proceeding, insisting that the prosecution ought to have properly prepared and served its proof of evidence.
“This is a criminal matter where the prosecution ought to have served us proof of evidence beforehand,” he said.
“A criminal trial is not supposed to be an ambush. What was served on us was not properly highlighted to assist us during tendering, so that we can examine the documents and determine whether to object or not.
“The court rightly directed that the proper thing should be done.”
Reacting separately, Jacobs maintained that the EFCC had fulfilled its legal obligations. “We served all the documents sought to be tendered,” he said.
“The complaint is that the documents are not paginated and not arranged chronologically. Our duty is to forward the documents to the defence, not to arrange them on their behalf.
“However, they insisted that the documents must be properly ordered and numbered to enable the court and parties to follow the proceedings.”
The EFCC has alleged that Ahmed and Banu unlawfully approved the diversion of UBEC matching grants, which are statutorily meant for basic education development, to pay salaries of civil servants—an action the commission said contravenes the conditions under which the funds were released.
At an earlier sitting, a former Accountant-General of Kwara State, Suleiman Ishola, testified that ₦1 billion, being part of the UBEC matching grants, was borrowed in 2015 to offset salary arrears owed to civil servants and pensioners.
The trial is expected to resume on February 16, 2026, for continuation of evidence.