The trial of Akindele Akintoye, Platforms Capital Investment Partners Limited and Duport Midstream Company Limited before Justice Ekerete Akpan of the Federal High Court, Abuja, continued on Tuesday 10, March 2026, with the court, slating April 14, 2026 for ruling on the admissibility of the formal request of Akintoye, the first defendant to acquire the Nigerian Content Development and Monitoring Board, NCDMB.
Securitynewsalert.com learned that the defendants are facing prosecution by the EFCC on an amended six-count charge, bordering on dishonesty and conversion of $35 million belonging to NCDMB.
During cross-examination of the Fourth Prosecution Witness, Isaac Yalah, by counsel for the first and second defendant, E.O. Adekwu, SAN, the witness confirmed to the court that the letter shown to him was a copy of a letter by the first defendant to the board of NCDMB to acquire NCDMB. “I confirm the letter now shown to me is a copy of that letter from the first defendant to buy off NCDMB entirely,” he said.
However, the application by the defence counsel to tender the document in evidence was opposed by prosecution counsel, E.E. Iheanacho, SAN, who urged the court to dismiss the application and reject the document. “I have an objection to the admissibility of this document. The ground is that, this document is a photocopy of an original and it is addressed to NCDMB which is a public institution and such document should have been certified.
The only admissible document in law of a copy of a public document is a certified true copy. We rely on Section 89 of the Evidence Act and Section 102 of the Evidence Act, and we also commend the case of Adeyefa against Bamgboye 2013, 10NWLR, part 1863 page 532. We also commend the case of Onwuzuruike against Edoziem 2016 6NWLR part 1508, page 205. We urge the court to discountenance it and dismiss it,” he said.
While urging the court to admit the document, counsel for the first and second defendant, highlighted some points of law, adding that the document was no more a public document, but a private one, stating also that the court ordered the document by way of subpoena. “In addition, this court ordered a subpoena, dated 19 November, 2025 to produce this document on NCDMB. Because of that, we submit that this document be admissible on all grounds and we urge my lord to admit it,” he said.
In reply to the subpoena, the prosecution counsel argued that “The subpoena issued was only to produce the document and not to tender a document in evidence, assuming such a subpoena is served to NCDMB, the officer of that institution can only produce the documents and place them before the court, and it does not cure any deficiency in admissibility of the document.
“The subpoena is not a basis for which a party can circumvent an evidence as the requirement of the admissibility of a document under the Evidence ACT. This witness was called by the prosecution not on the strength of the subpoena served. This witness is no longer a staff of NCDMB, having retired from the board and there is nothing to show that he was served with any subpoena or a subpoena brought to his attention. We urge the court to reject the document,” he said.
Justice Ekerete adjourned till April 14, 2026 for ruling on the admissibility of the document, May 18 and 19, 2026 for continuation of cross-examination.
