THE 17th prosecution witness in the ongoing alleged money laundering case filed against the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, and two others, said on Wednesday that the former governor was not involved in any of the property transactions before the court.
News Point Nigeria reports that the witness, Shehu Bello Bala, told the court, while being cross-examined by the Defendant’s Counsel, Paul Daudu, SAN, that the 2nd defendant did not also participate in any of the transactions.
He noted that one Farouk Bello served as the agent.
On cross-examination, he, however, noted that he was aware that the title documents – deed of assignment and power of attorney were returned to Efab Estate by Farouk Bello.
The witness had earlier said he was not in anyway related to Ali Bello and Farouk Bello, whom he had mentioned in his examination-in-chief.
He also confirmed that he was not from Kogi State, implying that he was not also related to the former governor.
The witness, a commodity trader, who said he was from Katsina State, noted that he met Ali Bello about 14 years ago.
“So you have known him long enough to know the kind of businesses he is into,” the Defendant’s Counsel said.
“I knew Ali Bello in the course of my business which is commodity trading. We have done quite a number of businesses like buying grains from the North .
“We buy ginger and other products from the North and sell it. This was around 2012-2013. I also know that he is into real estate,” the witness responded.
The Counsel to the 2nd and 3rd defendants, A.M. Aliyu, SAN, asked the witness if he knew the 3rd defendant, he said no, noting that he did not also partake in the transactions.
He told the court that at the time the title documents were returned to Efab Estate, Farouk Bello, who was his father’s friend, had passed on.
“Would I be correct to say that it was the children who said they wanted to collect the money on the property after the death of Dr Farouk Bello?” the Defendant’s Counsel asked.
“Someone came to me with documents concerning the property that they wanted to sell the property but I cannot confirm if he was Farouk Bello’s son,” the witness responded.
He confirmed that he took the documents back to the chairman of Efab Estate.
“That was when we realised that the property was being investigated,” he said.
He said the second property that was not marked by the EFCC was the one bought by Farouk.
“Will I be correct to say that Ali Bello inherited that property from his mother?” The Defendant’s Counsel asked.
The prosecution counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, interjected that the evidence the witness gave was not about inheritance.
But the Defendant’s Counsel said he was entitled to lay foundation for his defence and that he could ask the witness within his capacity.