By Wellington Jopelo
Fresh tension emerged at the Special Offences Court in Ikeja, Lagos, as the ongoing trial over alleged N76 billion and $31.5 million fraud linked to Arik Air in receivership took a new turn, with the defence raising serious concerns over the quality of the EFCC’s investigation.
The case, presided over by Justice Mojisola Dada, involves former AMCON Managing Director/CEO Ahmed Kuru, Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Union Bank Plc, and Super Bravo Limited, all standing trial over alleged financial irregularities connected to the airline’s restructuring process.
When proceedings resumed on April 28, EFCC investigator Mr Bawa Usman Kaltungo concluded his testimony as the fourth prosecution witness, but his cross-examination quickly shifted focus to the depth and methodology of the investigation.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Prof. Taiwo Osipitan, who represented some of the defendants, questioned whether the EFCC followed standard financial investigative procedures before arriving at its conclusions.
A key issue raised in court was the absence of a forensic audit. Under questioning, Kaltungo confirmed that no forensic accountant was engaged to independently verify Arik Air’s alleged indebtedness during the investigation.
He also admitted that he has no formal background in accounting, explaining that his role was strictly investigative. However, the defence argued that such a limitation significantly weakened the reliability of financial conclusions presented to the court.
The witness further faced scrutiny over his interpretation of the appointment of the Receiver Manager handling Arik Air. While he suggested that the receiver acted beyond his mandate, the defence countered that the appointment was backed by a valid court order.
Pressed further, Kaltungo conceded that his findings were based on his role as an investigator rather than any judicial or financial authority, a response the defence described as critical to the case.
Another major revelation came when he confirmed that no documentary evidence was found linking the accused parties to the sale of Arik’s loan from Union Bank to AMCON or related share transactions through Zenith Bank.
This admission, according to defence counsel, weakened the prosecution’s claim of coordinated wrongdoing among the defendants.
The investigator also attempted to rely on a legal opinion from the Office of the Solicitor General to support his report. However, cross-examination revealed that the document was obtained after charges had already been filed and trial proceedings had begun, raising questions about its evidential value.
The matter traces back to a petition filed by senior advocate Femi Falana on behalf of Arik Air’s promoter, which triggered the EFCC’s investigation into the airline’s financial restructuring and debt recovery process.
With both sides digging deeper into technical and procedural issues, the court has adjourned the case to May 18 and 19, 2026, for continuation of hearing, where further details on the investigation are expected to be examined.