Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has re-arraigned the Accountant General of Bauchi State, Sirajo Muhammad Jaja, and an unlicensed Bureau de Change operator, Aliyu Abubakar, trading as Jasfad Resources Enterprises, before Justice O. A. Egwuatu of the Federal High Court in Abuja over an alleged N1.63 billion money laundering scheme involving public funds belonging to the Bauchi State Government. The defendants were re-arraigned on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, on an amended five‑count charge bordering on conspiracy, conversion of public funds, and money laundering. The original charge had been filed on April 7, 2025, but in the amended charge marked FHC/ABJCR/101/2025, the roles of the defendants were reversed, with Abubakar becoming the first defendant and Jaja the second.
The staggering scale of the alleged fraud is detailed in the charge sheet. Count two states that between October 29, 2024, and December 31, 2024, the defendants and others at large converted N1,290,154,337.20 (One Billion, Two Hundred and Ninety Million, One Hundred and Fifty‑four Thousand, Three Hundred and Thirty‑seven Naira, Twenty Kobo) of Bauchi State public funds. The funds were transferred from the Bauchi State Sub‑Treasury Account, domiciled in the United Bank for Africa (UBA) with account number 1018819396, into the bank account of Jasfad Resources Enterprise, also domiciled in UBA with account number 1023444660. Count three alleges a further N426,116,013.70 (Four Hundred and Twenty‑six Million, One Hundred and Sixteen Thousand, Thirteen Naira, Seventy Kobo) converted between January 3, 2025, and March 14, 2025, through the same transfer pattern. The total sum involved in the two counts amounts to N1,635,270,350.90.
When the amended charges were read to them, both defendants pleaded not guilty. Their counsel, Gordy Uche (SAN) for Abubakar and Chris Uche (SAN) for Jaja, applied for the defendants to continue to enjoy the bail previously granted by the court, a request the prosecution did not oppose. However, the defence went further, challenging the competence of the amended charge. Gordy Uche moved a motion arguing that counts two, three, four, and five amounted to duplicity of action and would expose the defendants to double jeopardy, a fundamental breach of their constitutional rights. He asked the court to strike out those counts. Chris Uche supported this position, while the prosecution counsel, Abba Muhammed (SAN), opposed the application.
Justice Egwuatu, citing Section 395 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, reserved ruling on the defence’s challenge until the conclusion of the trial, effectively allowing the proceedings to continue while preserving the legal point for later determination. The court then proceeded to hear the prosecution’s first witness.
The Prosecution Witness One (PW1), Abimbola Williams, a compliance officer with the United Bank for Africa (UBA) with 20 years of experience, was called to the stand. She testified that in February 2025, the bank received a request from the EFCC for details on certain clients. “The request asked for the bank statements of Jasfad Resources account and the Bauchi State Sub‑treasury account,” she said. She confirmed that the documents were printed, certified by her, and handed over to the EFCC. When the prosecution sought to tender the documents, the defence raised objections but agreed that their objections would be expounded in their written addresses. The court admitted the documents as exhibits.
In her testimony, Williams narrated how money belonging to Bauchi State was allegedly moved from the state’s sub‑treasury account to the Jasfad Resources Enterprise account. She provided a detailed breakdown: on October 29, 2024, there was a debit transfer of N13,144,500; on the same day, another transfer of N7,196,300; on October 30, 2024, two transfers were made – one for N50 million and another for N7,321,000. She added that there were 18 other occasions on different dates within the period where similar transfers were made from the Bauchi State Sub‑treasury Account to Jasfad Resources. The pattern of transfers, she indicated, involved significant sums moved in rapid succession, raising red flags that prompted the EFCC’s investigation.
The involvement of a Bureau de Change operator in the alleged diversion of state funds is particularly troubling. Jasfad Resources Enterprises is described as a “purported Bureau de Change operator”, suggesting that the company may not have held the requisite licence from the Central Bank of Nigeria. The EFCC’s case appears to rest on the theory that public funds were secretly channelled through an unlicensed BDC as a conduit for money laundering, allowing the accused to convert the funds into foreign currency or to hide them through the complex web of financial transactions.
The Bauchi State Government has not yet commented on the case, but the alleged diversion of N1.63 billion from the state’s sub‑treasury account represents a significant drain on resources meant for public services. The Accountant General’s position is one of the most sensitive financial roles in the state, responsible for overseeing the disbursement of funds. The fact that the EFCC has re‑arraigned Jaja alongside a private BDC operator suggests that investigators believe the scheme involved collaboration between a senior civil servant and external accomplices.
After the PW1’s evidence‑in‑chief was concluded, Justice Egwuatu adjourned the matter until May 12, 2026, for the continuation of the trial. The prosecution is expected to call additional witnesses, including possibly officials from the Bauchi State Government and forensic analysts who will trace the flow of funds further. The defence, meanwhile, has signalled that it will vigorously challenge the admissibility of the bank documents and the legal basis for the charges. The outcome of this trial will be watched closely, not only by the people of Bauchi but by all Nigerians who have grown weary of official corruption. If the EFCC secures a conviction, it could serve as a powerful deterrent to other public officials tempted to divert state funds. If the defence succeeds, it will raise questions about the commission’s ability to prosecute high‑profile financial crimes effectively.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments