Nadabo Energy Claimed Subsidy for 9,150 Tonnes of Petrol Not Imported – EFCC Witness

Abubakar Ali Peters

By TONY ADAMS

The ongoing trial of Abubakar Ali Peters, chairman, Nadabo Energy, for an alleged N1.4 billion oil subsidy fraud, continued on January 26, 2021 with Justice C.A. Balogun of a Lagos State High Court, Ikeja admitting in evidence more documents against him.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC is prosecuting Peters, alongside his company, Nababo Energy Limited, for allegedly obtaining N1, 464,961,978.24 from the Federal Government as oil subsidy using forged documents.

They pleaded “not guilty” to the charge preferred against them.

At today’s sitting, Justice Balogun admitted in evidence, two letters from Q & Q Services Nigeria Limited written to the EFCC in response to two investigation letters earlier sent to the company by the anti-graft agency with regards to the transactions.

The two letters dated 20th March 2013 and 28th March 2013 were tendered in evidence by S.K. Atteh, the prosecuting counsel through the fifth prosecution witness, Abdulrasheed Bawa.

Identifying the documents, Bawa, an EFCC operative told the Court that the two letters from Q & Q Services Nigeria Limited were in response to the request of the EFCC to furnish it with the documents relating to transaction involving Nadabo Energy Limited.

According to Bawa, after studying the documents submitted to the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency, PPPRA, indicating that the defendant imported about 14,000 metric tonnes of PMS, the EFCC wrote an investigation activities letters to Q & Q Control Services Limited requesting for the authentication of the documents.

“Q & Q Control Services Limited responded via their letters dated 20th March 2013 and 28th March 2013 and attached several documents that were requested,” he said.

Atteh tendered the original copies of the letters.

No objection was raised from the defence counsel, Habeeb Oredola, who held the brief of J.B. Daudu.

Justice Balogun, thereafter admitted them in evidence as Exhibit L1 and L2.

The trial judge, also admitted in evidence as Exhibit K1 and K2, the copies of the two investigation letters written by the EFCC to the Q & Q Control Services Limited to which the company responded to through Exhibit L1 and L2.

Testifying, further, Bawa noted that Q & Q was contacted to confirm the genuineness or otherwise of the documents submitted by the defendant to PPPRA for the transaction.

He explained that from the analysis of the response, “we found out that contrary to the claim of the defendant as par Exhibit B, which they submitted to PPPRA to claim subsidy, the defendant imported only 4,850 metric tonnes of PMS as opposed to 14,000 metric tonnes that he claimed to have imported.”

 

 

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.