'N712m fraud': You have a case to answer, court tells Sule Lamido

‘N712m fraud’: You have a case to answer, court tells Sule Lamido

September 20

09:37 2022

Print This Article

A federal high court sitting in Abuja has ruled that Sule Lamido, former governor of Jigawa state, and his co-defendants have a case to answer in the N712 million money-laundering charges filed against him.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Lamido alongside two of his sons – Aminu Sule Lamido and Mustapha Sule Lamido.

Other defendants include Aminu Abubakar, business associate to the Lamidos and four companies – Bamaina Company Nigeria Limited, Bamaina Aluminium Limited, Speeds International Limited – and Batholomew Darlington Agoha.

The defendants are facing 37 amended charges.

After the EFCC closed its case, Lamido filed a no-case submission stating that the evidence provided by the prosecution did not disclose any case against him.

However, ruling on the no-case submission on Monday, Ijeoma Ojukwu, the judge, dismissed the no-case submission filed by Lamido.

The judge ordered him to open his defence on November 8.

Count one of the charges reads: “That you Alhaji Sule Lamido (while being the Governor of Jigawa State, Nigeria), on or about 15th of December,2008 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court in your account in the name of Bamaina Holdings (also referred to as Bamaina Holding Limited) domiciled at Unity Bank Plc. Kano, converted the sum of N14,850,000.00 (Fourteen Million, Eight Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira) being the value of Intercontinental Bank Plc.(now Access Bank Plc) cheque no. 00000025 paid by Dantata & Sawoe Construction Company Nigeria Limited which represented the proceeds of your illegal act to wit: using your position as a public officer for gratification by purportedly obtaining contracts for companies in which you have interest from Dantata & Sawoe Construction Company Nigeria Limited which was awarded contracts by Jigawa State Government with the aim of concealing its illicit origin and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 14(1) (a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004 and punishable under Section 14(1) of the same Act.”