Prosecution witness in the alleged money laundering trial of the immediate past governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, said the transactions between January 1, 2016 and April 2023, linked to the Kogi State government in Exhibit AH1, were done before he joined Access Bank Plc.

The witness, Olomotane Egoro also noted during the continuation of cross-examination yesterday, that he was not the account officer of the account in question.

Egoro, who is the 10th witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, in the ongoing trial, admitted, when asked, that his bank did not flout any rule of the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, by approving the cheques brought by the third defendant, Abdulsalam Hudu.

On Exhibit AP, the banker noted that the opening package of that particular account (Fazab Business Enterprise) was not before the court.

He said he could not confirm the business for which Fazab Business Enterprise was registered, though he admitted that opening a corporate account requires incorporation documents.

The banker added that he would not also know why the various local government areas paid money into Exhibit AP unless stated.

The defendant’s counsel, Zakari Abbas asked if Access Bank approved all the cheques brought by Yakubu Abenege.

“All the withdrawals were approved by the bank,” the witness responded.

“Did the bank breach any of the CBN rules?” Abbas asked.

“No, my lord,” Egoro responded.

The witness attention was then drawn to the transactions of May 6, 2022 in Exhibit AP, where narrations were stated for the inflows.

He confirmed that the inflow into the account from Okehi Local Government was for the supply of medical items.

After cross-examination, Justice Maryann Anenih adjourned the case till Thursday, March 12 for continuation of trial.

The witness had, at the preceding day’s hearing, told the court that no banking rules were breached with respect to transactions linked to the Kogi Government House account.

The compliance officer also said that there was no Post No Debit, PND, instruction against the account being tendered as evidence, while noting that the name of the former governor and the second defendant did not feature in the transactions.