Christopher Odofin tells FCT High Court that EFCC investigators did not interview Nigerian Air Force, FAAN or Katsina land officials during investigations into alleged N1.498bn airport contract fraud involving former Aviation Minister Hadi Sirika and three others.
By A1NEWS International
ABUJA, October 29, 2026
An investigator with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Christopher Odofin, has told the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, that he was unaware of a dispute between the Nigerian Air Force (NAF) and the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) over the site of an apron expansion project at Katsina Airport.
Odofin, the 12th prosecution witness (PW12) in the ongoing trial of former Aviation Minister, Senator Hadi Abubakar Sirika, and three other defendants, disclosed this during cross-examination by counsel to Al Buraq Global Investment Limited, Michael Numa, SAN.
The witness also admitted that EFCC investigators did not interview personnel of NAF, FAAN or the Katsina State Ministry of Lands during their investigation into the alleged contract fraud.
The testimony came amid proceedings over allegations that Sirika abused his office to confer an unfair advantage on Al Buraq Global Investment Limited in the award of a contract worth N1,498,300,750 for the expansion of the apron at Katsina Airport.
The defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charges.
EFCC Witness Admits He Did Not Investigate Land Dispute
During cross-examination, Numa questioned Odofin about the investigation into the availability and ownership of the land designated for the airport project.
The EFCC investigator acknowledged that he did not interview officials of the Katsina State Ministry of Lands to establish whether land had been allocated for the project.
He also confirmed that investigators did not interview personnel of the Nigerian Air Force or FAAN to determine whether either agency occupied or had operational interests in the disputed area.
Odofin maintained that, based on his investigation, there was no land available for the execution of the project.
However, he said he was unaware of any communication from the Katsina State Ministry of Lands indicating that land had been provided for the contract.
The witness also told the court that he did not know whether the land in question was being used by the Nigerian Air Force or whether the military had submitted documents to the EFCC concerning the site.
His admissions formed a key part of the defence counsel’s questioning about the scope of the commission’s investigation and the circumstances surrounding the project’s location.
Investigator Unaware of NAF-FAAN Dispute
Numa further asked the witness whether he knew of a dispute between NAF and FAAN that allegedly prevented Al Buraq from mobilising to the project site.
Odofin said he was unaware of the dispute and did not know whether it had prevented the company from commencing work.
He equally told the court that he did not know whether the dispute had subsequently been resolved, whether the contract had been re-awarded to Al Buraq, or whether the company had been directed to return to the site to execute the project.
The testimony raised questions during cross-examination about whether the investigation had established the circumstances surrounding the project’s site and the alleged inability of the contractor to proceed.
However, the witness’s lack of knowledge of the dispute does not, on its own, establish whether the dispute existed, whether it affected the project or whether it had any bearing on the allegations against the defendants.
Witness Insists EFCC Investigation Was Thorough
Despite the issues raised during cross-examination, Odofin maintained that the EFCC investigation was thorough and that relevant documents had been collected for the prosecution.
According to the witness, the materials submitted to him during the investigation were included in the proof of evidence presented in the case.
He also confirmed that investigators interviewed the then Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Aviation, Abel Enitan; the ministry’s Director of Procurement, Musa Odiniya; and Azubuike Okorie, who testified as the first prosecution witness.
However, Odofin disclosed that the statements obtained from those individuals were not video-recorded.
The questioning focused on the evidence gathered by the EFCC, the officials interviewed and the steps taken to establish the circumstances surrounding the award and execution of the airport contracts.
BPP Approval and Contract Details Under Scrutiny
During the proceedings, Odofin was shown documents relating to contracts for the construction of a terminal building and the expansion of the apron at Katsina Airport.
The witness maintained that the contracts were one, although he confirmed that the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) had granted approval for the contracts.
The distinction between the terminal building project and the apron expansion contract featured in the questioning as the defence examined the documentation supporting the prosecution’s allegations.
The case centres, among other issues, on the EFCC’s allegation that Sirika used his ministerial position to influence the award of the apron expansion contract to Al Buraq Global Investment Limited.
The prosecution alleges that the contract was valued at N1,498,300,750.
EFCC Says Aviation Ministry Had No Official Affiliation With Defendants
Odofin also told the court that the Federal Ministry of Aviation had no affiliation with the second and third defendants, Fatima Hadi Sirika and Hamman Jalal Sule.
He noted that the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, where the two defendants respectively worked, had no authority over the Ministry of Aviation.
The witness further confirmed that Al Buraq Global Investment Limited had other shareholders and directors apart from Fatima Hadi Sirika and Hamman Jalal Sule.
However, he acknowledged that the other shareholders and directors were not among those being prosecuted in the case.
These exchanges formed part of the defence’s examination of the relationships between the defendants, the company and the ministry responsible for the contracts under investigation.
Sirika, Three Others Face Six-Count Charge
Sirika is standing trial alongside his daughter, Fatima Hadi Sirika; his son-in-law, Hamman Jalal Sule; and Al Buraq Global Investment Limited.
The EFCC is prosecuting the defendants before Justice Sylvanus Oriji of the FCT High Court, sitting in Maitama, Abuja, on a six-count charge bordering on alleged abuse of office and contract fraud involving approximately N2.8 billion.
According to the commission, Sirika allegedly used his position as Aviation Minister to confer an unfair advantage on Al Buraq Global Investment Limited in connection with contracts awarded during his tenure.
The charge cites provisions of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000; the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004; and the Penal Code Act applicable in the FCT.
The defendants have denied the allegations and pleaded not guilty.
The allegations remain before the court, and the prosecution is required to establish its case through admissible evidence.
Court Adjourns Proceedings
Justice Oriji adjourned the case until November 18, 2026, for the continuation of the cross-examination of Odofin, the 12th prosecution witness.
The next hearing is expected to provide a further opportunity for the defence to question the EFCC investigator on the evidence gathered, the scope of the investigation and the circumstances surrounding the disputed airport project.
As proceedings continue, the court will determine the issues arising from the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defence.
Leave a Reply