Contradictions emerge in key exhibits on Mambilla power project approval
By A1 News Desk | Abuja, Nigeria | April 30, 2026
Fresh twists have emerged in the trial of former Minister of Power, Dr. Olu Agunloye, as a prosecution witness admitted discrepancies in documents relating to a 2003 Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting.
The witness, Ugochukwu Ikoli, a lawyer with the Federal Ministry of Justice, made the admission on Thursday while testifying before the FCT High Court in Apo, Abuja.
Agunloye is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) before Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie on an amended seven-count charge bordering on alleged disobedience of presidential directives, conspiracy, forgery, and receipt of gratification.
The EFCC alleges that the former minister received N5.212 million in 2019 through an intermediary, Jide Abiodun Sotirin, from Leno Adesanya of Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited. The payment was allegedly linked to the conveyance of Federal Government approval for the construction of the 3,960MW Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project.
The prosecution also accuses Agunloye of conspiring to forge official correspondence relating to the project during his tenure in office. He has, however, pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Witness Confirms Multiple Extracts
Under cross-examination by defence counsel, Adeola Adedipe (SAN), the witness acknowledged that two separate extracts of the May 21, 2003 FEC meeting were before the court, contradicting his earlier position that only one extract existed.
The documents, admitted as Exhibits EFCC 3K and EFCC 3D, were shown to contain notable differences.
Variations in Content and Structure
Ikoli explained that Exhibit EFCC 3K contained Memo 14 with two referenced paragraphs, while Exhibit EFCC 3D included an additional Paragraph 13 with five sub-paragraphs not present in the earlier exhibit.
He further noted that certain features appeared in one document but were absent in the other, highlighting inconsistencies in the records presented.
Clarification on Nature of Extracts
The witness clarified that extracts are not complete documents but portions derived from original records.
“An extract is a copy of the content of the original document,” he said, adding that while multiple copies may retain identical content, their format and scope could differ depending on the purpose of extraction.
He also acknowledged that individuals preparing such extracts may exercise discretion in selecting relevant portions.
Prosecution Closes Witness Examination
Following the cross-examination, prosecution counsel Mohammed Abba (SAN) indicated that the defence had concluded its questioning of the witness.
Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie subsequently adjourned the matter until June 1, 2026, for continuation of trial, as the court continues to examine evidence surrounding one of Nigeria’s most significant power sector projects.
![Nigerian military prepares to cordon the area where a man was killed by suspected rebel fighters during an attack around the Polo area of Maiduguri, Nigeria, in 2019 [File: Afolabi Sotunde/Reuters]](https://a1news.com.ng/wp/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Nigeria-military-on-patrol.webp)
Leave a Reply