Ademola ‘collected’ an N8.4m luxury vehicle from a SAN, says witness

Ifeoma Ofornagolu, a sales consultant, says Adeniyi Ademola, a judge of the federal high court Abuja, received a BMW 320i brand worth N8.4 million in the name of his son.

Ademola is accused of receiving bribe in millions of naira and a luxury car to divert the course of justice. His home was among those of the seven judges raided by the department of state services (DSS) on allegations of corruption.

According to the 15-count charge against him and his wife bothering on corruption and abuse of office, they are alleged to have “criminally conspired to receive and/or obtain gratification contrary to sections 8(1) and 26 (c) of the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission Act, 2011 land punishable under Sections 8(1) (iii) of the same law”.

In the charges, Joe Agi, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), is said to have given Ademola and his wife over N130 million in exchange for favourable judgements.

While testifying in court on Monday at the commencement of Ademola’s trial, Ofornagolu said Agi purchased the vehicle in the name of Ademide Adeniyi, Ademola’s son.

She said the deal to purchase the vehicle began in December 2014 and was concluded on January 5, 2015.

She explained that while N8 million was the price of the BMW, N400, 000 was paid as VAT on the same vehicle.

“I had a deal with Joe Agi; Ademide’s name came up after the sale of the car. Agi requested that it should be put into writing,” she said while fielding questions from Segun Jegede, the prosecution counsel.

“He said the invoice be put to him but the attention should be to Ademide.”

After tendering oral evidence, Jegede prayed the court to receive a written evidence from the witness but Onyeychi Ikpeazu and Jeff Ngukwu, counsels to Ademola and Agi respectively, objected to it.

They argued that the witness’s statement to the DSS was not done under oath.

On his part, Ikpeazu told the court that according to the evidence Act, a witness could not submit written evidence after presenting an oral statement.

“A prior consistent statement is inadmissible by the same witness,” Ikpeazu said.

Hearing into the case has been adjourned to ‎January 17.