When asked, whether he was aware that a consultant was hired to source for loan for the project from NEXIM Bank and Bank of Industry, he said he did not bother to extend his interview to the two banks.
“We did not interview any official of NEXIM bank during the course of investigation because we felt it was not necessary. Our investigation was strictly on the petition that was before us” he said.
The ICPC witness also admitted that he did not understanding the nature of the equipments needed for the stroke centre when the quote for equipment cost alone was in excess of 2 billion naira was presented to him.
He also claimed that he did not know that the couple live in the U.K, as he has never followed them there.
The defence however accused ICPC of tendering before the court extract of the documents they felt would be favourable to their case, knowing fully well that all the documents were relevant to the case.
At the end of the cross-examination, Mr
Egwuonwu,, SAN, senior sought to tender the a bundle of documents in the matter as exhibit but was objected to, by counsel to ICPC, Mr. Osuobeni Ekoi Akponmisingha.
In his objection, Akponmisingha said the proper foundation for the tendering of the has not been laid.
“The proper foundation for the tendering of the document has not been laid.
“They did not specify which document is crucial to their case. They did not tell the court whether they have submitted the originals of the documents to the ICPC. Where are the original documents?”
Egwuonwu, in his response, said that all the documents submitted to the prosecution are relevant to the case of the defendants.
He said the documents had been submitted to the commission since 2016 and therefore, they cannot turn around and object to the tendering of the documents.
He told the court that the prosecution cannot pick and choose which of the documents in the bundle presented to the court they can certify and bring before the court as evidence.
He said what the prosecution did choosing and picking which of the document to certify as evidence before the court amounts to persecution of the defendants and not prosecution.
They were charged to court for allegedly misappropriating N233.6 million.
The SURE-P money in question was a SEED grant and not counterpart funding.
The Medical Doctor and his wife were charged to the court forallegedly misleading officers of the Commission, frustrating investigation and misappropriating funds meant for the establishment of a stroke centre in Nigeria being funded partly by the defunct Subsidy Reinvestment Empowerment Programme (SURE-P) and personal money of the Professor and his wife.
The case has been adjourned to October 17th and 25th, 2018.