The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, yesterday told a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja how the immediate past Governor of Benue State, Gabriel Suswam alongside his Commissioner for Finance, Omadachi Okolobia, stole over N3.1bn from the state treasury.
At the resumed trial, the prosecutor, Detective Junaidu Sa’id, said his team took up the case following a petition dated July 14, 2015 against the Suswam and Oklobia.
Sa’id told the court that in the course of their investigations, it was discovered that the Suswam gave a directive for shares owned by the State Government be sold so as to raise the sum of N10bn.
The prosecutor said, following the directive, Elixir Investment Partners was appointed as stockbrokers to oversee sale of the shares, from which over N9 billion was realised.
He also stated that Elixir Investment Partners, was instructed to pay the N9bn raised from the sales of the shares into three different bank accounts, adding that another instruction was given for the payment of N1bn to be made into Benue Investment Properties Company’s account, while the balance of N8bn be paid into two separate accounts with the name of Benue State Ministry of Finance.
The prosecutor further stated that while Elixir was trying to pay the sum into the two separate accounts of the Benue State Ministry of Finance as directed, it was discovered that one of the accounts does not belong to the Ministry but to one Fanffash Resources.
Following the discovery, Elixir sought clarification from Okolobia, who mandated the company to pay N5bn into the account of Benue State Ministry of Finance while N3.1bn be paid into Fanffash Resources account.
Sa’id said the owner of Fanfash Resources, Abubakar Umar, was invited by the EFCC who confirmed that he received N3.1bn and converted same to its dollar equivalent, amounting to $15.8m, adding that he later delivered it in cash to former Governor Suswam at his Maitama Residence in Abuja.
The court however adjourned the case till January 18, and 19 2016 for cross examination of the witness and continuation of hearing.
Comments