- Court Frees Oshodin, Firm in ₦ Multi Billion Money Laundering Case
- Oshodin and company acquitted of all 25 criminal counts
- Judge rules evidence was speculative and legally insufficient
The Federal High Court in Abuja has acquitted and discharged Isabella Mimie Oshodin and Bob Oshodin Organisation Ltd of all charges in a high-profile money laundering trial.
Delivering judgment, the court held that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, as required by law. The defendants had faced a 25-count charge bordering on conspiracy to commit money laundering, transfer of funds allegedly derived from unlawful activities, and possession of proceeds of crime.
EDITOR’S PICKS
- Teenagers Attempt Bomb Attack At Maiduguri Teaching Hospital
- APC Elects New National Executives, Full List Emerges
- Why I Resigned As Kano Deputy Governor – Gwarzo
EKO HOT BLOG reports that the prosecution also alleged that some of the funds were used to acquire properties in the United States. Central to the case was the alleged diversion of funds linked to former National Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki, which the prosecution claimed formed the basis of the charges.
However, the court ruled that key evidence presented by the prosecution was insufficient to establish the defendants’ knowledge or intent to engage in unlawful transactions. It further noted that several statements relied upon during trial were inadmissible because they were neither electronically recorded nor taken in the presence of legal counsel, in violation of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.
The court also observed that no concrete documentary evidence was presented to show that funds were transferred to foreign accounts or used to purchase the alleged properties abroad. The absence of testimony from the former NSA further weakened the prosecution’s case.
During the proceedings, Oshodin testified that her husband, Robert Oshodin, was ill and residing in the United States, adding that she became involved after being contacted by a consultant. She maintained that the funds received were for legitimate business activities, including the sale of the family’s furniture manufacturing business and youth empowerment programmes in the Niger Delta and South South region.
She also informed the court that she had refunded ₦180 million to the government following inquiries by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, stressing that transactions were conducted through the Presidential Amnesty Office and not directly with the Office of the National Security Adviser.
The defence team, led by Senior Advocates of Nigeria Adegboyega Awomolo and Olajide Olaleye Kumuyi, argued that the prosecution failed to establish that the funds were proceeds of crime, and that several key statements relied upon were inadmissible.
They also noted the absence of critical witnesses from the Amnesty Programme who could have clarified the nature of the transactions.
The prosecution, represented by H.M. Mohammed, insisted that evidence from multiple witnesses showed that the defendants were associates of the former NSA and received substantial payments following his appointment. The prosecution further argued that the funds were laundered into foreign accounts and used to acquire properties in the United States.
In its ruling, the court reaffirmed that criminal prosecution requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, and that all elements of an offence must be clearly established. Citing legal precedents including Olayiwola v. State (2021), Momodu v. State (2023), and Adekoya v. State (2017), the court emphasised that the burden of proof rests solely on the prosecution.
The court concluded that the prosecution’s case was speculative and failed to establish the alleged offences, while the defence evidence was clear, credible, and corroborated.
“In final analysis, the prosecution’s evidence is speculative and fails to establish the offences beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, all defendants are discharged and acquitted of all counts,” the court ruled.
