Former CBN director claims to have received $600,000 as contract gratification for Emefiele
Posted by badgeBusayo on 0

Mr. John Ayoh, a former Director of Information Technology at the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), has disclosed details about how he allegedly received $600,000 as contract gratification for Mr. Godwin Emefiele, the former governor of the CBN.

Telegram Link Join Now Join Now

Edo Youngin Album

During the court proceedings at the Ikeja Special Offences Court, Mr. Ayoh, who served for eight years at the apex bank, provided insight into the transactions facilitated through Emefiele.

Godwin Emefiele in court surrounded by his lawyers

Ayoh, Head of Procurement and Support Services (PSS) Department, revealed that he received $400,000 at his residence in Lekki and another $200,000 at the Tinubu Head Office of the CBN.

He explained that he was responsible for receiving applications for contract awards and selecting successful bidders. He further stated that Emefiele instructed him to bring the envelope containing the money directly to his office.

The witness clarified that the transactions were related to Netapp Storage Architectural and Infrastructural Services and emphasized that he did not participate in any criminal activities.

Under cross-examination, Ayoh affirmed that Emefiele was not a member of the PSS but rather part of the Major Contract Tender Committee (MCTC). He also denied writing in his statement that he acted under duress while running errands for Emefiele.

The prosecution objected to certain questions during cross-examination, leading to arguments about the admissibility of the witness's statement as evidence. Eventually, the statement was admitted into evidence by Justice Rahman Oshodi.

Ayoh mentioned that instructions from Emefiele sometimes involved bending rules. The case was adjourned until May 3 for continuation of cross-examination, with Emefiele's counsel requesting self-recognition bail due to his bail application not yet being processed.

The court granted the request, with a deadline set for May 17. The decision was made with no objections from the defense counsel or prosecution, leaving the matter to the discretion of the court.