A prosecution witness in the alleged ₦80.2 billion money laundering trial involving former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, on Thursday told the Federal High Court in Abuja that Ali Bello made several cash payments for the construction of a property in Maitama.
The witness, Shehu Bello, who testified before Justice Emeka Nwite, said the payments he personally knew about included ₦9 million, ₦8.5 million and ₦5.8 million, all allegedly paid in cash for the development of a property located at Plot 1891, Dala Hills, Maitama, Abuja.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission is prosecuting Yahaya Bello over an alleged ₦80,246,470,088.88 money laundering case.
Led in evidence by prosecution counsel, Olukayode Enitan (SAN), the witness said his involvement in the Maitama project began after Ali Bello approached him for recommendations on a construction company.
According to him, he introduced Metro Deck Construction Company Limited for the project after Ali Bello requested assistance in finding a reputable firm to handle the construction.
The witness further told the court that payments to the construction company were made through both bank transfers and cash transactions.
READ MORE:Yahaya Bello’s trial postponed till March 8
EFCC witnesses admit massive withdrawals from Kogi accounts, say Yahaya Bello not beneficiary
“The ones that I’m aware of; ₦9 million, ₦8.5 million and ₦5.8 million, these are the only three payments I am aware of in cash,” he said.
Shehu Bello also testified about another property located at Plot 1058, Cadastral Zone A08, Wuse II, Abuja, which he said Ali Bello intended to develop into shops.
According to the witness, the property was purchased from SFC Foods Limited for ₦650 million through a bank transfer.
During proceedings, the witness confirmed making statements to the EFCC during the investigation and identified the documents presented in court as bearing his signature.
Following the confirmation, the prosecution sought to tender the extra-judicial statements as evidence.
However, defence counsel, Adebayo Adedeji (SAN), objected, arguing that the prosecution could not tender the extra-judicial statement of its own witness as substantive evidence.
Responding, prosecution counsel insisted the documents were admissible because the witness had acknowledged making the statements and they were relevant to the case.
After hearing arguments from both parties, Justice Nwite adjourned the matter until June 15 and 18, 2026, for ruling on the admissibility of the statements and continuation of trial.
