The trial of the Managing Director of Nadabo Energy Limited, Abubakar Ali Peters, over an alleged N1.4 billion petroleum subsidy fraud continued before the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja on Tuesday, with the court admitting additional documentary evidence tendered by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Justice Ismail Ijelu admitted the documents during proceedings in the case involving Peters and his company, Nadabo Energy Limited, who are facing a 27-count charge bordering on alleged forgery and obtaining money by false pretence from the Federal Government under the Petroleum Support Fund (PSF) scheme.
The matter was previously handled by Justice C.A. Balogun before it was reassigned to Justice Ijelu following the former judge’s retirement.
According to the EFCC, the defendants allegedly used forged documents to obtain N1,464,961,978.24 as petroleum subsidy payments from the Federal Government.
One of the charges alleges that on April 3, 2012, Peters and Nadabo Energy Limited fraudulently obtained N978.4 million by falsely claiming subsidy for the importation of 19.49 million litres of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), whereas investigations allegedly showed that the company imported only about 6.5 million litres.
The anti-graft agency also accused the defendants of forging a marine insurance certificate purportedly issued by Staco Insurance Plc to facilitate the subsidy claims.
The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to all the charges.
EFCC investigator recounts probe
At Monday’s proceedings, the prosecution, led by S.K. Atteh, called its third witness, EFCC investigator Adaobi Amanda Obiakor, who narrated how the Commission investigated the alleged fraud.
Obiakor told the court that the investigation commenced after the EFCC received petitions dated January 5, 2012, from the Minister of Petroleum Resources and several civil society organisations alleging widespread fraud in the petroleum subsidy regime.
She said the Commission subsequently wrote to the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), requesting documents relating to marketers involved in the subsidy scheme, including Nadabo Energy Limited.
According to her, the PPPRA supplied several documents that formed part of the investigation.
The prosecution tendered the petitions, correspondence between the EFCC and PPPRA, and the agency’s responses. Defence counsel, Paul Daodu (SAN), did not object to their admissibility, following which Justice Ijelu admitted them as exhibits.
The witness further testified that the investigation revealed allocations granted to Nadabo Energy Limited in August 2011 and subsequent import permits.
She added that documents obtained during the investigation showed that the transactions were financed by Enterprise Bank, prompting the EFCC to write to the bank on February 8, 2012.
Obiakor told the court that Enterprise Bank responded on February 18, 2013, informing the Commission that one of the documents attached to the EFCC’s inquiry did not originate from the bank and provided what it described as the authentic version.
The court also admitted correspondence between the EFCC and Enterprise Bank, alongside certified true copies of relevant banking documents.
The witness further said the EFCC traced subsidy payments made by the PPPRA through Sky Bank Plc, now Polaris Bank.
Letters exchanged between the Commission and the bank, together with the bank’s responses and other banking instruments, were also admitted without objection.
Among the documents tendered were shipping records relating to MT Evridiki and MT St. Vanessa, indicating cargo volumes, as well as trade documents showing Petrolcam Trading (PTY) Limited as the trader and Nadabo Energy Limited as the marketer under a transaction valued at about 4.78 million dollars.
Additional exhibits admitted included correspondence between the EFCC and Petrolcam, shipping documents, Corporate Affairs Commission records, company documents and further correspondence with the PPPRA.
Court admits disputed email
The prosecution also tendered an email allegedly sent by Afeni Awani to former EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa during the investigation, accompanied by a certificate of identification.
The defence objected to the admissibility of the email, arguing that it was sent to Bawa’s personal email address and did not comply with Section 84 of the Evidence Act governing electronically generated evidence.
Justice Ijelu, however, overruled the objection and admitted both the email and the accompanying certificate as exhibits.
The court also admitted a summary of the transactions prepared by Bawa, as well as the extra-judicial statements made by the defendants.
Defence begins cross-examination
During Tuesday’s proceedings, defence counsel commenced the cross-examination of the prosecution witness.
Obiakor confirmed that she was a member of the EFCC investigation team but acknowledged that her name did not appear in the investigation report already admitted in evidence.
She also identified Exhibit P27, a letter dated January 20, 2012, addressed to the Managing Director of Nadabo Energy Limited, stating that it was prepared and signed by Olaolu Adegbite.
While testifying on Exhibit P29(a), the extra-judicial statement of Peters, the witness admitted there was nothing on the document indicating it was recorded in her presence.
She nonetheless maintained that the statement, obtained on January 28, 2012, and February 8, 2013, was made voluntarily, adding that no legal practitioner was present when it was taken.
The witness also admitted that she neither authored nor signed Exhibit P8, a letter dated June 21, 2012, and did not prepare Exhibit P10.
When asked whether any of the documentary exhibits before the court showed that she was part of the investigation team, Obiakor replied that her name did not appear on any of the documents.
She further stated that she participated in the investigative visit to the Lagos depot but did not take part in the team’s visit to the Port Harcourt depot.
Following the cross-examination, Justice Ijelu adjourned the matter until October 12 and 13, 2026, for continuation of trial.