THE defence and prosecution have closed their cases in the ongoing trial of former Nigerian Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, at the Southwark Crown Court in the United Kingdom.
News Point Nigeria reports that Alison-Madueke is standing trial alongside Olatimbo Ayinde, an oil executive, and Doye Agama, her brother, on a five-count charge bordering on the alleged acceptance of bribes.
All three defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charges.
British prosecutors accused the former minister of accepting bribes in the form of luxury goods and high-end properties from industry figures who allegedly believed she would use her influence to favour them in oil contracts.
However, Alison-Madueke and her legal team have consistently denied all allegations levelled against her.
The former minister served as Nigeria’s petroleum minister from 2010 to 2015.
During Tuesday’s proceedings, Jonathan Laidlaw, counsel to Alison-Madueke, delivered his closing arguments before the court.
According to THISDAY, Laidlaw accused UK prosecutors of failing to prosecute the alleged bribe givers, relying on questionable evidence and failing to provide crucial materials necessary for the defence.
The lead defence counsel argued that while Alison-Madueke was being prosecuted, the wealthy oil businessmen alleged to have paid bribes to her had not been charged.
“One can be forgiven whether parliament, in its wisdom, when enacting the Bribery Act, could have contemplated this absurd situation where the people who are alleged to have paid the bribes are free, while the accused has been held prisoner for 11 years,” Laidlaw was quoted as saying.
Laidlaw further stated that officials of the UK’s National Crime Agency were absent during the October 2015 raid on Alison-Madueke’s Abuja residence.
According to him, none of the items allegedly recovered during the operation were photographed in their original locations, while the National Crime Agency itself does not possess the original materials currently being relied upon in court.
The defence counsel also alleged that key documents capable of supporting Alison-Madueke’s case had disappeared, including records relating to reimbursements and official documentation tied to her ministerial duties.
He faulted the prosecution’s claim that records concerning the former minister’s official movements and fund disbursements do not exist.
Laidlaw additionally criticised the prosecution for relying heavily on evidence generated by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission while rejecting correspondence from the same agency tendered in support of co-defendant Ayinde as unreliable.
In his own closing submission, lead prosecutor Alexandra Healy reiterated allegations that some oil executives provided improper benefits to Alison-Madueke while their companies benefited from lucrative state contracts during her tenure as petroleum minister.
Healy told the jury that it was inappropriate for a serving minister to have her lifestyle funded by individuals conducting business with the Nigerian state.
The prosecutor disagreed with the defence’s argument that all benefits had been reimbursed in Nigeria, stating that no documentary evidence of reimbursement had been produced and that no such explanation was raised during earlier police interviews.
Healy further noted that the former minister had been aware of the investigation for nearly a decade.
The prosecution also referenced a £1 million payment linked to businessman Benedict Peters, describing the use of intermediary structures in the transaction as an “extraordinary device” allegedly intended to conceal the true nature of the payment.
The jury is expected to deliver its verdict later this week.