An Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness has told the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, that ₦1.425 billion transferred through two companies linked to Abba Adaudu, an associate of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello, was intended for foreign exchange transactions.....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

amilu Abdullahi, a forex dealer, disclosed this on Thursday while testifying as the 19th prosecution witness in Bello’s ongoing trial before Justice M. E. Anenih.

Abdullahi told the court that Adaudu paid the money to purchase foreign currency and that he supplied the corresponding amount in US dollars based on the prevailing exchange rate.

Bello is standing trial alongside Umar Shuaibu Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu on a 16-count charge bordering on alleged criminal breach of trust and money laundering involving ₦110.4 billion. The defendants have not been convicted, and the allegations remain before the court.

Led in evidence by prosecution counsel Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, alongside Olukayode Enitan, SAN, and Bolu Agbaje, SAN, the witness identified Keyless Nature Limited and Ejadams Essence Limited as companies belonging to Adaudu.

According to Abdullahi, ₦100 million was transferred through Keyless Nature Limited on December 15, 2021, followed by additional transactions totalling ₦400 million on December 17 of the same year.

He further testified that ₦600 million was transferred through Ejadams Essence Limited on February 18, 2022, while another ₦325 million passed through the company on February 21, 2022.

The witness said the transactions carried out between December 2021 and February 2022 amounted to ₦1.425 billion.

He explained that whenever the money was paid into his accounts through cash deposits or electronic transfers, he supplied Adaudu with the equivalent value in US dollars.

Abdullahi added that the currency exchanges were usually conducted either at his office or at Adaudu’s office. He said Adaudu typically contacted him before or after making cash deposits to inform him that the funds were meant for foreign exchange dealings.

The forex dealer also testified about the bank accounts of E-Traders Limited, one of his companies. He identified Exhibit AR as the company’s statement of account with the Mararaba branch of First City Monument Bank (FCMB).

He told the court that cash deposits made into the account at Access Bank’s Lokoja branch between July 2021 and April 2022 were connected to Adaudu.

Although some transaction descriptions bore his name, Abdullahi said he did not personally make the deposits, explaining that he had never visited the Access Bank branch in Lokoja.

He gave a similar explanation regarding deposits dated February 22 and transactions recorded on March 10 and 11, 2022.

The witness also identified Exhibit AK, another account statement, and attributed several cash deposits made on December 29 and 30, 2021, as well as January 31 and February 1, 2022, to Adaudu or individuals acting on his behalf.

He maintained that the transactions were related to foreign exchange dealings.

Witness Makes Admission During Cross-Examination

During cross-examination, however, Abdullahi admitted that he could not establish whether any of the defendants personally made the cash deposits because he was not present at the bank when the transactions occurred.

He also confirmed that the names of the first and second defendants did not appear in E-Traders Limited’s account statement as depositors.

The witness further disclosed that he was the sole signatory to the account.

Despite these admissions, Abdullahi maintained that the transactions involving Keyless Nature Limited and Ejadams Essence Limited were forex dealings associated with Adaudu.

He said he could not remember the total amount of foreign currency he supplied to Adaudu but explained that he usually provided the equivalent value of the transactions, either in cash or, occasionally, through bank transfers.

According to him, payments made in cash were delivered in foreign currency.

Witness Testifies On School Fees Payments

Abdullahi also gave evidence concerning payments made towards the school fees of children attending the American International School.

He told the court that Adaudu supplied the account details and names of the beneficiaries for the transactions.

The children were identified as Fatima Bello, Zarrah Bello, Zayan Bello, Farid Bello and Na’ima Bello.

The witness said he arranged the payments through colleagues rather than carrying them out personally. He added that neither Adaudu nor the children’s parents complained about the transactions.

He identified Exhibit AX10(1–4) as telex documents issued by the American International School in connection with the payments.

According to Abdullahi, he forwarded the documents to Adaudu for confirmation after the transactions had been completed.

During cross-examination, the forex dealer admitted that he did not know the parents of the children whose school fees he helped to pay. He also confirmed that he did not personally execute the payments but relied on colleagues to handle the transactions.

The witness further disclosed that he operated another company known as De Remita.

He told the court that the statements he made to the EFCC in 2022 contained details and illustrations of the transactions with Adaudu that he could recall at the time. He also confirmed that he had not made any further statement to the commission since then.

Court Adjourns Trial

Earlier in the proceedings, a lawyer informed the court that an application had been filed seeking the withdrawal of the surety of the third defendant.

The lawyer said all parties had been served with the application, but it was not yet ready for hearing.

Counsel representing the third defendant confirmed receipt of the application and requested time to prepare a response.

Pinheiro suggested that the application be heard on the next adjourned date to prevent disruptions to the ongoing trial.

The court subsequently proceeded with the hearing.

However, after defence counsel indicated that the witness was tired, Justice Anenih adjourned the case until October 27 and November 24, 2026, for the continuation of proceedings.

Bello and his co-defendants are facing a 16-count charge involving alleged criminal breach of trust and money laundering amounting to ₦110.4 billion.

The court has yet to determine the allegations against them.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino has been asked to make public documents concerning his abandoned World Cup commercial rights proposal and provide answers to unresolved questions, with his leadership position potentially facing further challenges if he fails to do so.....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

The demand followed a three-and-a-half-hour meeting of the FIFA Council in Zurich on October 15, the first since details of the controversial FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal became public.

The proposal, which Infantino withdrew within days of its disclosure, would have transferred part of FIFA’s commercial rights to a private investment firm.

Football Association chair Debbie Hewitt, who is also a FIFA vice-president, said Infantino apologised during the meeting but did not address questions raised by council members.

According to the BBC, Hewitt expressed disappointment that the council had not received answers to its specific requests, including access to documents relating to the FFE proposal.

“One of the disappointing things is that we didn’t get answers to anything that we had specifically requested; for example, getting the papers from FFE,” Hewitt said.

She explained that she had asked why the documents were not provided but was instead told to submit the questions in writing.

“I think the man has to answer those questions and if he doesn’t answer those questions now, he’s not fit to be FIFA president, and that was what was shared in the meeting,” she added.

Hewitt acknowledged that Infantino had expressed regret but questioned the sincerity of his apology, particularly because he had failed to present the proposal to the council before it became public.

She said council members had openly voiced their concerns about how the matter was handled.

“What he really apologised for was not bringing it to the council. If you regret it that deeply, share it with us,” she stated.

Beyond the controversy surrounding the FFE proposal, the meeting also addressed other issues, including the suspended red-card ban involving United States striker Folarin Balogun, the FIFA Peace Prize and funding for national football associations.

Meanwhile, the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) has continued to oppose Infantino’s leadership, repeatedly calling for him to resign and preparing criminal legal proceedings against him.

UEFA has also filed claims in three United States courts seeking the disclosure of all documents connected to the FFE proposal.

When asked whether Infantino’s apology had changed her position, Hewitt said she had not received any new information that would alter her assessment of the controversy.

“From my position, nothing has shifted. I’ve no new information that makes me feel any differently, other than we do have an apologetic president,” she said.

The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has rejected the Federal Government’s decision to postpone negotiations for a new national minimum wage until June 2027, insisting that discussions must begin immediately.....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

The labour union maintained that preparations for a fresh wage agreement should commence without further delay, alongside measures to reduce petrol prices, introduce tax relief and approve wage awards to cushion the effects of rising living costs on workers.

The demands were outlined in a letter dated October 13, 2026, signed by NLC President Joe Ajaero and addressed to the Minister of Labour and Employment, Dr Muhammad Maigari Dingyadi.

The Congress warned that the government’s response failed to adequately address the economic challenges confronting Nigerian workers, raising the possibility of an industrial dispute as its 14-day ultimatum continues.

Although the NLC did not declare a strike in the letter, sources within the union reportedly indicated that industrial action could become an option if the outstanding issues were not resolved before the ultimatum expires.

The Federal Government had argued that the current national minimum wage of ₦70,000, which President Bola Tinubu signed into law on July 29, 2024, would not be due for review until June 1, 2027.

In its response to the union’s earlier demands, the government maintained that the law provides for a minimum wage review every three years, making an earlier exercise premature.

Dingyadi argued that beginning another wage review barely two years after the implementation of the existing agreement could disrupt industrial relations.

“Commencing a fresh review exercise barely two years into the implementation of the current wage, which represented an increase of over 133 per cent from the previous minimum wage of ₦30,000, would be premature, inconsistent with the law, and disruptive to the orderly industrial relations system envisaged by the Act,” the minister stated.

The government also highlighted measures introduced to ease economic hardship, including the Presidential Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Initiative, food security programmes and other social intervention schemes.

It added that the Ministry of Labour was engaging relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies to address the remaining demands, while assuring the union that the National Minimum Wage Tripartite Committee would be convened at the appropriate time.

However, the NLC insisted that the government’s response failed to resolve the fundamental issues raised by organised labour.

While acknowledging the ministry’s relatively swift response, the Congress stressed that a prompt reply without concrete action would not provide meaningful relief to workers.

“The Congress notes that, for the first time in recent history, the Ministry has responded with relative speed to our resolutions. We acknowledge this departure from the usual culture of bureaucratic silence,” the letter stated.

It added, “However, while we appreciate this prompt acknowledgement, we are constrained to observe that speed without substance may amount to an empty gesture.”

The union described the government’s position as inconsistent with the principles of law, economic realities and social justice.

At the centre of the disagreement is the interpretation of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2019, as amended in 2024.

While the Federal Government maintains that the next review is due in June 2027, the NLC argues that the timeline should be calculated from the original legislation enacted in 2019.

According to the Congress, the original Act was signed into law on April 18, 2019, meaning that a review was due by April 18, 2024.

“The National Minimum Wage Act, 2019, which the 2024 Amendment Act amended, was signed into law on 18 April 2019. Under the clear provisions of that Act, a review was statutorily due by 18 April 2024,” the union argued.

The NLC maintained that the 2024 amendment did not repeal the original legislation or eliminate the statutory timeline for reviewing the minimum wage.

The union also recalled that organised labour had agreed to reduce retrospective wage arrears during the 2024 negotiations following appeals from the government over the financial burden on employers and public institutions.

It insisted that the concession should not be interpreted as an abandonment of the statutory review timeline.

The Congress further argued that negotiations for a new minimum wage should begin at least six months before the proposed implementation date to prevent delays and the accumulation of unpaid arrears.

Based on this position, the union said negotiations should commence by October 17, 2026.

It clarified that it was not demanding the immediate implementation of a new minimum wage but wanted the negotiation process to begin without further delay.

“The Government is not being asked to implement a new wage immediately, but to commence the negotiation process,” the letter stated.

The proposed steps include obtaining nominations from relevant stakeholders, inaugurating the tripartite committee and establishing an agenda for negotiations.

According to the NLC, beginning the process early would give the government, employers and organised labour sufficient time to agree on a new wage.

NLC Raises Alarm Over Declining Value Of ₦70,000 Minimum Wage

Beyond the legal disagreement, the labour union argued that rising living costs had significantly eroded the purchasing power of the current ₦70,000 minimum wage.

It noted that although the statutory wage increased from ₦30,000 to ₦70,000, workers had not experienced a corresponding improvement in their ability to afford essential goods and services.

The Congress attributed the situation to inflation, the depreciation of the naira and increasing prices of basic commodities.

“The Federal Government must understand that a wage increase immediately eroded by inflation is not a meaningful improvement in workers’ purchasing power; it is merely a statistical illusion. While the nominal wage increased by 133 per cent, real wages have actually declined,” the union stated.

The NLC also blamed rising petrol prices for increasing transportation costs and driving up the prices of food and other necessities.

It said many Nigerian workers were struggling to meet basic expenses, including food, rent, healthcare, education and transportation.

The union further questioned the effectiveness of the CNG initiative, alleging that inadequate infrastructure, gas supply shortages and limited availability of conversion kits had prevented many Nigerians from benefiting fully from the programme.

“Workers cannot feed their families with an initiative that has yet to deliver the promised relief, especially when their children are hungry today,” the letter stated.

NLC Lists Demands, Warns Against Further Delays

The Congress called on the Federal Government to implement immediate measures to ease the economic pressure on Nigerian workers.

Its demands include:

• Petrol price reduction: Lower petrol prices to the level prevailing when the current minimum wage was signed into law in 2024.
• Tax relief: Implement tax relief measures agreed upon in 2023.
• Wage awards: Approve immediate wage awards to help workers cope with rising living costs.
• JOHESU agreement: Implement the terms of settlement reached with the Joint Health Sector Unions.
• JPSNC demands: Resolve outstanding issues raised by the Joint Public Sector Negotiating Council.
• Minimum wage negotiations: Begin discussions on a new national minimum wage without further delay.

The NLC maintained that the government could provide meaningful relief if it demonstrated sufficient political will.

“Procrastination is no longer a policy choice; it constitutes a direct threat to the survival and well-being of Nigerian workers,” the letter stated.

The union also warned that continued discussions without clear timelines or immediate relief measures would fail to address workers’ concerns.

“We acknowledge your assurance that your office remains open to dialogue. However, dialogue without concrete timelines and immediate relief measures amounts to mere rhetoric,” it added.

The Congress reaffirmed its commitment to pursuing improved working conditions and economic relief for Nigerian workers.

However, the letter did not announce a specific date for a strike, leaving the possibility of industrial action dependent on the outcome of engagements with the Federal Government and the expiration of the union’s ultimatum.