An Ikeja Special Offences Court has fixed May 4 to rule on the admissibility of statements made by Henry Omoile, co-defendant in the ongoing trial of former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele.

Justice Rahman Oshodi adjourned the matter on Friday after counsel to both parties adopted their final written addresses in a trial-within-trial to determine whether Omoile’s statements to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) were made voluntarily.

Emefiele is facing a 19-count charge bordering on alleged gratification, corrupt demands and abuse of office involving large financial transactions, while Omoile is standing trial on three counts relating to alleged unlawful acceptance of gifts as an agent in transactions linked to the apex bank.

The prosecution said the alleged transactions involved about 4.5 billion dollars and N2.8 billion.

At the proceedings, Omoile’s counsel, Adeyinka Kotoye (SAN), urged the court to reject the prosecution’s submissions, arguing that there was no video evidence to support the voluntariness of the statements.

He contended that the absence of video recording violated provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) and weakened the credibility of the statements.

Kotoye further told the court that his client was coerced into making the statements with promises of freedom, insisting that video recording remained the most reliable means of verifying compliance with due process.

Counsel to Emefiele, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), aligned with the argument, maintaining that statements obtained through inducement or oppression were inadmissible under the law.

He said the burden was on the prosecution to prove that the statements were made voluntarily, adding that the failure to do so raised doubts about their credibility.

However, EFCC counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), opposed the submissions, describing them as an abuse of court process.

Oyedepo argued that the statements were obtained in substantial compliance with the law and in the presence of the defendant’s lawyer, even though they were not video-recorded.

He added that the content of the statements contradicted claims of coercion, noting that Omoile did not implicate Emefiele in any wrongdoing.

The court had instituted the trial-within-trial following Omoile’s claim that he was coerced, threatened and induced to make statements to EFCC investigators.

The ruling will determine whether the statements will be admitted as evidence in the substantive trial.