Nigeria Drops Charges Against Adoke, Others in Malabu Oil Deal

The federal government of Nigeria has opted not to contest the no-case submissions put forth by former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke and five others in connection to the Malabu Oil and Gas deal. This decision follows the acknowledgment by the prosecution that the evidence and testimonies presented were insufficient to establish the defendants’ alleged involvement in criminal offenses.

Counsel for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Offem Uket, conceded that the evidence and testimonies of the 10 witnesses called in the case were not robust enough to link the six defendants to the allegations of criminal offenses. Nonetheless, the prosecution contended that a prima facie case had been successfully made against the 3rd defendant, and therefore, he should be directed to enter his defense in a 35-count criminal charge.

The defendants, which include Adoke, Aliyu Abubakar, and Rasky Gbinigie, were collectively charged with various offenses in connection to the sale of Operating Mining Licence (OPL 45), also known as Malabu Oil. They pleaded not guilty to all charges, and the trial began with the prosecution calling 10 witnesses before concluding its case.

In response to the allegations, the defendants argued that the prosecution had failed to establish credible evidence linking them to the charges and urged the court to dismiss and acquit them. The prosecution acknowledged their lack of sufficient evidence to support the allegations, leading them to endorse the majority of the defendants’ no-case submission.

While the prosecution concurred with the no-case submission made by the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th defendants with respect to certain counts, they expressed their intention to oppose the no-case submission made by the 3rd defendant in relation to other counts, believing that there is overwhelming evidence to justify calling the 3rd defendant to enter his defense.

The prosecution argued that the evidence before the court demonstrated that the 3rd defendant conspired with others to commit criminal breach of trust and forgery. They asserted that the 3rd defendant was involved in preparing and signing forged documents, and therefore should be required to enter his defense.

The decision by the federal government not to challenge the no-case submissions marks a significant development in the ongoing legal proceedings related to the Malabu Oil and Gas deal. The prosecution’s admission that they lacked strong enough evidence to link the defendants to the allegations of criminal offenses is a positive development for the defendants.

The course of action regarding the case against the 3rd defendant is yet to be determined, as the prosecution seeks to establish a prima facie case against him for using forged documents as genuine.

In conclusion, the federal government’s decision not to contest the no-case submissions in the Malabu Oil deal case is an important development. As the legal proceedings continue, it is imperative that the court thoroughly evaluates all the evidence presented before reaching a decision.