EFCC to Arraign Bodejo For Alleged $2.530m Terrorism Financing, Money Laundering Offences

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC is set to arraign Bello Abdullahi Bodejo before a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja over allegations bordering on terrorism financing and money laundering to the tune of $2.530 million.
Eereporter.com

The EFCC, on Monday, June 22, 2026 filed a twelve-count charge before the Federal High Court against Bodejo, alleging him of receiving and possessing large sums of cash in foreign currency linked to proceeds of unlawful activities in contravention of the Money Laundering( Prevention & Prohibition) Act, 2011.

Bodejo, linked to Bauchi State Governor, Bala Mohammed, is expected to take his plea before the court in the coming days as the Commission commences formal proceedings.

Count one of the charges read: “That you, BELLO ABDULLAHI BODEJO (mele adult), on or about the 11th day of January 2022, at Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did knowingly and willfully, without lawful authority or excuse, accept a payment of the sum of One Hundred Thousand United States Dollars (USD $100,000) in physical currency from one SA’IDU ABUBAKAR, a former Accountant-General Bauchi State who is currently in the lawful custody of the Nigerian Police Force, which exceeded the statutory cash transaction threshold of Five Million Naira GN5,000,000.00) prescribed under Section 1(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) without routing the said transaction through a financial institution as required by law, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 16(1)(d) of the Money Laundering Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 16(2)(b) of the same Act.”

Count two reads: “That you, BELLO ABDULLAHI BODEIO (male adult), on or about the 21st day of January 2022, at Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did knowingly and willfully, without lawful authority or excuse, accept a payment of the sum of Two Hundred Thousand United States Dollars (USD $200,00) in physical currency from one SA’IDU ABUBAKAR, a former Accountant-General of Bauchi State who is currently in the lawful custody of the Nigerian Police Force, which exceeded the statutory cash transaction threshold of Five Million Naira GN5,000,000.00) prescribed under Section 1(a) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended), without routing the said transaction through a financial institution as required by law, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 16(1)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 16(2)(b) of the same Act.”

Another count alleges that on March 20, 2024, Bodejo received $500,000 in physical cash from the same source, an amount said to have exceeded the legal cash transaction threshold prescribed under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

Count four reads, “That you, BELLO ABDULLAHI BODEJO (male adult), on or about the 7th day of February 2024, at Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did knowingly and willfully, without lawful authority or excuse, accept a cash payment of the sum of Nine Hundred and Eighty Thousand United States Dollars (USD $980,000.00) in physical currency from one SA’IDU ABUBAKAR, a former Accountant-General of Bauchi State who is currently in the lawful custody of the Nigerian Police Force which sum exceeded the statutory cash transaction threshold of Five Million Naira (5,000,000.00) prescribed under Section 2(1)(a) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, without routing the said transaction through a financial institution as required by law, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 19(1)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022 and punishable under Section 19(2 )(b) of the same Act.”

EFCC

According to count ten, Bello Abdullahi Bodejo allegedly took possession of $980,000 in Abuja on or about February 7, 2024, under circumstances in which he either knew, or reasonably ought to have known, that the funds were proceeds of unlawful activity, specifically money laundering. The conduct allegedly constitutes an offence under Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, and is punishable under Section 18(3) of the same Act.

All the alleged offences are punishable under various provisions of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended), and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

Further proceedings are expected to follow as the Commission awaits the arraignment date.
Eereporter.com

ADC: Onanuga “No Hunger” Comments Reflect Tinubu’s Disconnection From Reality

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has accused the Tinubu administration of grave insensitivity, following comments by Presidential Spokesman Bayo Onanuga that he does not see the level of hunger and hardship being reported across the country.
Eereporter.com

In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the party said Onanuga’s views reflect the dominant thinking in the Tinubu-led government, which it said confirms its long-standing position that the administration is disconnected from the reality faced by millions of ordinary Nigerians.

The full statement read:

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has condemned recent comments by Presidential Spokesman, Mr. Bayo Onanuga, claiming that he does not see the level of hunger and hardship Nigerians are talking about. Those comments are not merely insensitive; they are a startling admission of how disconnected the APC government has become from the realities of the people it governs.

When over 80% of Nigerians are struggling to feed their families, pay school fees, afford transportation and keep their businesses alive, it is extraordinary that a senior presidential spokesman can publicly suggest that the hardship is somehow overstated or even contrived.

The truth is that Nigerians are not faking their suffering. The unprecedented cost-of-living crisis confronting the country today is the direct result of the ill-conceived and poorly executed economic policies of the Tinubu administration, which have thrown millions more into acute poverty since this government came to power. Food prices have soared, transportation costs have multiplied, the value of incomes and savings has been eroded, and millions of Nigerians who were managing before are now trapped in economic distress.

This is not opposition propaganda. It is the daily lived experience of ordinary Nigerians in every state of the federation.
What makes Mr. Onanuga’s comments particularly troubling is that they reveal a government that has become tragically insular and could no longer do anything differently. A sensible government does not measure the effects of its policies by merely looking at the people within its immediate circle or driving through paved roads.

It must listen to the people in the markets, on the farms, in the classrooms, in the workshops and in the streets. If the Presidency genuinely cannot see the hunger and hardship that Nigerians are talking about, then it raises serious questions about whether it sees the people at all.
The APC government will undoubtedly point to roads infrastructure projects as its achievements. While even this is debatable, the fact remains that Nigerians cannot eat roads.

The first responsibility of any government is to create economic conditions in which citizens can afford food, find jobs, run businesses and live with dignity. On this most fundamental test, the Tinubu administration has failed. After three years of promises, excuses and appeals for patience, the reality for 62% of Nigerians is that life is harder today than it was when this government took office.

The ADC believes that leadership begins with honesty. The question is no longer whether Nigerians are suffering; Nigerians already know that they are. The real question is whether this government is prepared to acknowledge the consequences of its policies and accept responsibility for its historic failures.

ADC

Until it does, comments such as those made by Mr. Onanuga will only reinforce the growing perception that the APC government is out of touch with the people and unwilling to confront the damage its economic policies have inflicted on ordinary Nigerians.
Eereporter.com

Signed:

Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, National Publicity Secretary, African Democratic Congress (ADC)

Alleged N109bn Fraud: Court Adjourns Former AGF Idris Case Till October 13 For Adoption Of Final Written Address

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, High Court, Maitama, Abuja, on Wednesday, June 24, 2026, adjourned the trial-within-trial in the alleged N109.5 billion fraud case involving a former Accountant-General of the Federation, Ahmed Idris, till October 13, 2026, for adoption of final written addresses.
Eereporter.com

Idris is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, alongside Geoffrey Olusegun Akindele, Mohammed Kudu Usman and Gezawa Commodity Market and Exchange Limited on a 14-count charge bordering on stealing and fraudulent diversion of public funds to the tune of N109.5 billion.

The trial-within-trial was ordered by the court on November 22, 2022, following an application by counsel to the first defendant, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, who alleged that statements made by his client to the EFCC were obtained through deception and inducement.

At the resumed proceedings on Wednesday, defence counsel, Chris Uche SAN, informed the court that the matter was for continuation of trial-within-trial and that the defence had a witness to present.

The defence subsequently called Hajiya Safiya Idris as its witness.

Led in evidence by Uche, the witness identified herself as Safiya Idris of Efab Estate, Guzape, Abuja. She told the court that she had a long-standing family relationship with the first defendant and regarded him “like a father.”

Recounting events of June 6, 2022, she stated that she visited the EFCC Headquarters in Abuja to see Idris but was initially informed that he was not in the detention facility.

“I was told he wasn’t in the cell but in the main building. I went there to see if I would be able to see him but I wasn’t allowed. We waited for a long time before I was eventually allowed to enter the office that he was in,” she said.

According to her, upon gaining access to the office, she was asked by two EFCC officers identified as Hayatu and Mahmud to sign as a witness to a statement being written by the defendant.

When shown the statement in question, she confirmed that the signature and handwriting on it were hers.

Explaining why she wrote that the statement was taken in her presence, Safiya said she had been assured that Idris would be released.

Under cross-examination by the prosecution counsel A.O Atolagbe, the witness admitted that she was neither invited nor investigated by the EFCC and that she went to the Commission on her own volition.

She further alleged that the defendant had already written the statement before she was allowed into the office and that she only signed after the statement had been concluded.

Asked whether the first defendant knew she was at the EFCC before she was called into the office, she answered in the negative, adding that he only became aware of her presence when she was invited in to sign the document.

The prosecution also drew her attention to the contents of the June 6, 2022 statement, particularly the portion which read: “In addition to my last statement, I wish to state that I am writing this statement in the presence of Hajiya Idris Safiya.”

When asked if that portion was written before she entered the interrogation room, the witness replied that she did not know at what stage it was written.

She also confirmed that her name did not appear on any of the other statements made by the defendant because she was not present when those statements were taken.

When asked why she did not lodge any complaint after signing the statement if she felt compelled to do so, she admitted that she did not make any complaint and agreed that she was under no obligation to write anything for the EFCC since she was not under investigation.

Court

However, she insisted that she was not lying when she wrote that the statement was taken in her presence.

Following the conclusion of her testimony and with no further questions from the prosecution, the witness was discharged.

Thereafter, Uche informed the court that the defence was closing its case in the trial-within-trial.

Justice Halilu subsequently adjourned the matter till October 13, 2026, for adoption of final written addresses.
Eereporter.com