By Nkechi Eze
A Federal High Court sitting in Kaduna has admitted into evidence the written statement of Mr. Samuel Aruwan, the third prosecution witness (PW3), in the ongoing money laundering trial involving former Senior Special Adviser to the immediate past Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, Mr. Jimi Lawal, and three others.
The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) is prosecuting Mr. Lawal, alongside the former Kaduna State Accountant-General, Mr. Umar Waziri, and the former Commissioner for Finance, Mr. Yusuf Inuwa, for alleged abuse of office and diversion of public funds through fraudulent estacode payments. Also joined in the suit is Solar Life Nigeria Limited, a company whose bank account allegedly received the diverted funds.
According to an official statement signed by the ICPC’s Director of Public Enlightenment, Demola Bakare, the case, marked FHC/KD/16C/2025, involves allegations that the defendants conspired to divert ₦64,800,562.00 (Sixty-Four Million, Eight Hundred Thousand, Five Hundred and Sixty-Two Naira) in three tranches of ₦10 million, ₦47.48 million, and ₦7.32 million into the account of Solar Life Nigeria Limited, where Mr. Lawal is believed to be the sole signatory.
During the proceedings, the prosecution called three key witnesses: former Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice of Kaduna State, Mrs. Aisha Dikko Kalil; former Head of Service, Mrs. Bariyatu Yusuf; and former Commissioner for Internal Security and Home Affairs, Mr. Samuel Aruwan.
The witnesses collectively denied receiving any estacode payments from Mr. Lawal, contrary to the defence’s claim that the ₦64.8 million in question was designated as estacodes for foreign training programs undertaken by senior government officials.
In his testimony, Mr. Aruwan clarified that his professional trainings were fully sponsored by the United States Government and the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA), and not by the Kaduna State Government. He further stated that while he had a professional acquaintance with Mr. Lawal, he neither received estacode allowances from him nor from the State Government.
Following his testimony, the prosecution sought to tender Mr. Aruwan’s written statement as evidence. Defence counsel objected on procedural grounds, contending that the statement was obtained during the pendency of the trial.
In a ruling delivered by Honourable Justice R. M. Aikawa, the Court dismissed the objection, holding that PW3 was not an interested party in the matter and that the statement was admissible. The statement was consequently admitted as Exhibit 9, and the prosecution concluded its examination-in-chief.
When the matter was called for cross-examination, counsel to the second defendant, J. J. Usman, SAN represented by a junior from his chambers, sought an adjournment on account of the senior counsel’s absence. The Court granted the request and adjourned the case to November 3, 2025, for cross-examination and continuation of hearing.
The ICPC reaffirmed that the prosecution of Mr. Lawal and his co-defendants is part of its sustained effort to entrench integrity, transparency, and accountability in the management of public funds across all levels of government.
