Tuesday saw the continuation of Olu Agunloye’s trial before Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie of the Federal High Court, Apo, Abuja, regarding the alleged $6 billion Mambilla Power Project fraud. A prosecution witness testified that the contract award memo was withdrawn at the direction of the Federal Executive Council (FEC).
During cross-examination, Umar Hussein Babangida, the third prosecution witness (PW3), revealed that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (FEC) under former President Olusegun Obasanjo had explicitly told the defendant to revoke the memo that had awarded the Mambilla Power Project contract to Sunrise Power Transmission Company Limited, rather than approve reducing government equity to 10%.
It was never requested by the FEC that the defendant limit the approval to a 10% government equity involvement, according to Babangida. “Instead, he was told to take back the award memorandum.”
Allegedly without the necessary approval, Agunloye was accused of awarding the contract for the Mambilla Hydro Electric Power Project to Sunrise Power Transmission Company Limited.
Defence attorney Adeola Adedipe, SAN, questioned the witness during the proceedings as to whether he had seen “Exhibit EFCC 3s,” which contained a legal opinion by former Attorney General of the Federation Michael Aondoakaa, which advised the Federal Government on reviving the contract because of its legal implications.
Consequently, Babangida wrote off the report, calling it nothing more than “the opinion of the former Attorney General of the Federation.”
In a letter dated May 20, 2016, to then President Muhammadu Buhari, he similarly minimised another legal opinion made by former Attorney General Abubakar Malami. This opinion supposedly reinforced Aondoakaa’s position on the Mambilla project.
The question was raised by prosecution counsel Abba Mohammed, SAN, who questioned his knowledge of the 2012 settlement terms pertaining to the contract award to Sunshine Power Transmission Ltd. The terms were entered into between the Minister of Power, the Attorney General of the Federation, and two others.
The court rejected the course of inquiry and supported the objection.
The prosecution also raised objections when the defence sought the witness’s knowledge of legislation pertaining to the privatisation of the electricity supply chain and whether any statute requires federal agencies to seek FEC approval prior to contracting.
“Hypothetical, not factual and in the realm of speculation,” Abba Mohammed, SAN, characterised the query, and he went on to say that it broke Section 128 of the Evidence Act.
He contended that the report in question failed to cite any legislation. “It is inappropriate to require the witness to cite statutes.”
Following this, Justice Onwuegbuzie postponed the case’s continuation until Wednesday, February 18, 2026.