A former Chief of Administration at the Nigerian Air Force headquarters, Air Vice Marshal Mohammed Alkali Mamu, yesterday told an Abuja High Court on how the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) forced him to write a statement against his wish. The Federal Government is prosecuting Mamu over an alleged bribery.
During yesterday’s proceedings before Justice Salisu Garba, Mamu, who pleaded not guilty to the four-count amended bribery charge preferred against him by the antigraft agency, told the court that he was coerced to write a tutored and teleguided statement by the EFCC operatives on excessive expenditure in the NAF.
Mamu, led in evidence by his counsel, Chief Joseph Daudu, SAN, narrated that the EFCC did not only suppress his statement but also threatened to drag in his two daughters to court, should he fail to refund the money he was being accused of collecting as bribe.”
He explained that he requested and insisted that I needed my lawyers during my interrogation and when my statement was obtained but the EFCC refused and said that I did not need one.
“Commander Sunday Jigawa, who was at that time NAF Deputy Director escorted me to the commission and I requested to have him present during my interrogation and when my statement was obtained but they declined. The first statement I wrote is not before this court. The additional statement marked n1 and n4 obtained from St1 was removed from the statement I made."
He told the court that the antigraft agency impounded his vehicles which are still in their custody and prayed the court for an order to return the vehicles and/or replace them. He also prayed the court to compel the EFCC to return the sum of $300,000 and N5.9 million obtained from him.
Responding the, prosecuting counsel, Sylvanus Tahir, who had opposed the tendering of the 2nd document said, the documents were never part of the proceedings. The counsel, wondered why a document addressed to the AGF will be tendered to a different agency of government and added that they were gross violation of Section 102, 103 and 104 of the Evidence Act and therefore cannot be admissible.
Justice Garba adjourned to 13 and 14 December for ruling on the objections of prosecution counsel to the admissibility of some of the documents and for cross examination by the prosecution.
