$6.23m Fraud Trial: EFCC Says Evidence Links Emefiele to Alleged Forged Letters, Controversial CBN Contracts
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has insisted that former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, has a case to answer over the alleged withdrawal of $6.23 million and the award of contracts said to have conferred undue advantages on his associates.
The commission made its position known on Tuesday, October 20, 2026, while opposing Emefiele’s no-case submission before Justice Hamza Mu’azu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Maitama, Abuja.
The EFCC, through the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, urged the court to reject the application, arguing that the evidence presented by the prosecution had established a prima facie case requiring the defendant to enter his defence.
Emefiele is standing trial on an amended 20-count charge involving alleged criminal breach of trust, forgery, abuse of office, conspiracy, obtaining money by false pretence and the alleged conferment of corrupt advantages in the award of CBN contracts.
Oyedepo told the court that the purpose of a no-case submission was not to determine the defendant’s guilt or assess the credibility of witnesses but to establish whether the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to warrant a defence.
He argued that requiring Emefiele to respond to the allegations would not shift the burden of proving his innocence to him.
EFCC Alleges Irregularities in Contract Awards
Addressing the contract-related charges, the prosecution alleged that companies linked to Emefiele’s wife, brother-in-law and associates benefited from contracts awarded under circumstances that allegedly undermined established procurement procedures.
Oyedepo cited exhibits bearing Emefiele’s approval signatures and corporate records allegedly connecting him to the companies, including Architekon Nigeria Limited.
He told the court that contracts valued between $6 million and $10 million were allegedly processed without the required review by the Major Contracts Tender Board.
According to him, contracts exceeding $1 million were expected to pass through the Board before recommendations were submitted to the CBN governor for approval.
The Board was also responsible for checking whether CBN staff members held directorship positions in companies seeking contracts from the bank.
The prosecution argued that the alleged failure to submit the contracts to the Board prevented the necessary checks and scrutiny from taking place.
Relying on the testimony of PW10, a staff member of the CBN procurement department, Oyedepo alleged that at least three companies submitted bids for each contract but that officials were instructed to favour a company linked to Emefiele’s associates.
He further claimed that the company was informed of the bank’s internal prices and subsequently submitted bids matching those figures.
According to the prosecution, the alleged arrangement denied other bidders a fair opportunity to compete for the contracts.
“The ingredient of the offence is the unfairness of the process,” Oyedepo said.
He maintained that the defence could not defeat the charges merely by arguing that the contracts had been executed or that the money involved had not been directly traced to Emefiele.
The prosecution also alleged that the company had not secured contracts of a similar nature for years before Emefiele became CBN governor but subsequently received all 45 contracts being examined by the court.
Oyedepo further cited evidence of transfers from Emefiele’s personal account to the company’s account, arguing that the transactions supported the prosecution’s claim that he knew the company and its directors.
He insisted that the former CBN governor had a responsibility to refer the contracts back to the Major Contracts Tender Board rather than approve them.
“The recommendation would never be an approval,” he told the court.
Alleged $6.23m Withdrawal and Forged Letters
The prosecution also defended the allegations surrounding the withdrawal of $6.23 million from the CBN.
Oyedepo told the court that the money was withdrawn between February and around June, before Emefiele’s removal from office, allegedly using letters attributed to former President Muhammadu Buhari and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha.
He argued that evidence from witnesses, including Mustapha and a forensic analyst, showed that the letters used to facilitate the withdrawal were forged.
The prosecution further relied on testimony from PW15, who reportedly stated that the transaction triggered an automatic notification to Emefiele after the relevant account went into debit.
Oyedepo alleged that Emefiele failed to act on the notification despite his position and control over the funds.
He argued that the circumstances raised issues of criminal negligence and breach of trust.
The prosecution also alleged that the money was released to an individual on Emefiele’s instructions, with part of the funds used to renovate one of his properties. The remaining amount was reportedly recovered from the individual.
Countering the defence’s argument that the allegations were based on speculation, Oyedepo maintained that courts could draw reasonable inferences from admissible evidence.
He also argued that the absence of a forensic examination of Emefiele’s signature did not automatically invalidate the forgery allegation, noting that the court could compare disputed signatures in line with the law.
The prosecution additionally referred to a Supreme Court decision involving approximately $2 million and certain properties, urging the court to consider the authority in the context of the case.
Defence Seeks Emefiele’s Discharge
In response, defence counsel Mathew Burkaa, SAN, urged the court to discharge Emefiele, arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish the essential elements of the alleged offences.
Burkaa specifically disputed the allegation that his client had conferred undue advantage on his wife and associates.
“My lord, in the entirety of the charge, the prosecution failed to prove that he had conferred undue advantage on his wife and his associates,” the defence counsel said.
The court did not immediately rule on the application but stated that the date for its decision on the no-case submission would be communicated to the parties.
Emefiele has not been convicted of the charges, and the allegations remain subject to determination by the court.
