Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, adjourned further hearing in the alleged ₦76 billion and $31.5 million fraud trial involving a former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), Ahmed Kuru, and others, to June 25, 2026.
Kuru is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) alongside Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Roy Ilegbodu, Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, and Super Bravo Limited on a six-count charge bordering on conspiracy, stealing, and abuse of office.
One of the counts reads: “That you, Union Bank Nigeria Plc, sometime in 2011 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with the intention of causing and/or inducing the unwarranted sale of Arik Air loans and bank guarantees with Union Bank, made false statements to the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) regarding Arik Air Limited’s performing loans, following which you transferred a bogus figure of N71,000,000,000.00 (Seventy-One Billion Naira) to AMCON.”
Another count reads: “That you, Ahmed Lawal Kuru, Kamilu Alaba Omokide, as Receiver Manager of Arik Air Limited, and Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Chief Executive Officer of Arik Air Limited in Receivership, sometime in 2022 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, fraudulently converted to the use of NG Eagle Limited the sum of N4,900,000,000.00 (Four Billion, Nine Hundred Million Naira), property of Arik Air Limited.”
During cross-examination by counsel to the first and third defendants, Prof. Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, at Tuesday’s proceedings, the fourth prosecution witness (PW4), Usman Bawa Kaltungo, stated that the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) only acquires secured non-performing loans from banks, and not all categories of debts.
The prosecution team, led by Wahab Shittu, SAN, also objected to the admissibility of certain letters allegedly written by the first and third defendants to the EFCC, arguing that the documents were photocopies and had not been properly certified.
“It is a photocopy. On that basis, it is inadmissible; it lacks certification. If they intend to rely on them, then they should have certified them,” the prosecution argued.
Responding, Osipitan urged the court to reserve the objection until the stage of final written addresses.
In her ruling, Justice Dada held that since the original copies were with the EFCC and had been identified by the witness, they should be produced in court whenever necessary.
The court consequently directed that the original copies be produced on the next adjourned date, while the documents were admitted and marked as Exhibit P53.
At the prompting of the defence counsel, the witness read portions of the letter from AMCON to the EFCC seeking intervention to avert the arraignment of some AMCON officials.
According to the witness, the letter stated that all actions taken by AMCON and the receiver managers were decisions of the corporation’s Board of Directors, arising from duly convened official meetings.
When asked whether he had seen any reply from the EFCC acknowledging that the first and third defendants acted in their official capacities, the witness replied: “That is their opinion. To the best of my knowledge, that letter was addressed to the Chairman. It is not all correspondences that the EFCC replies to. I neither saw nor knew of any reply.”
Asked whether AMCON as an institution was charged in the matter, the witness responded in the negative.
On whether any funds were traced to the personal accounts of the first and third defendants as proceeds of the alleged fraud, the witness said: “None.”
While referring the witness to Exhibit P17, a petition written by Falana and Falana’s Chambers, the defence counsel asked whether Arik Air was already in receivership when the petition was written.
