Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja has recused himself from the N10 billion money-laundering trial involving Ali Bello, chief of staff to Kogi State Governor Usman Ododo, following an unresolved allegation that a court registrar tampered with a key piece of evidence.
Gatekeepers News reports that Omotosho announced his withdrawal from the case on Thursday when the matter came up for the adoption of written addresses on the no-case submissions filed by Bello and his co-defendant, Dauda Sulaiman. The judge said continuing with the case could create perceptions capable of undermining confidence in the judiciary and the administration of justice.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) filed the case in 2022. Bello and Sulaiman are facing a 10-count charge over alleged diversion of funds belonging to the Kogi State Government. Both defendants have pleaded not guilty to the allegations.
The development centres on Exhibit N, a mobile phone containing WhatsApp conversations relating to transactions connected with the case. The court registrar, Nasir Zubairu Onimisi, had earlier admitted that he tampered with the exhibit.
According to Justice Omotosho, Onimisi came to his residence on February 5, 2026, and confessed that he had tampered with the phone after allegedly being promised a house in Abuja by the defendants. The judge subsequently played a recording of the conversation in open court, where the registrar confirmed what he had told the judge.
“When the matter was called at about 10:00am, I played in open court the recording of the conversation that had taken place in my sitting room when Nasir came to disclose these facts to me,” Omotosho said.
The judge said the phone was subsequently examined in open court and the court discovered that its contents had indeed been tampered with. He then ordered the arrest of the registrar and the defendants for investigation, including forensic examination of their phones and calls.
The investigation was still unresolved when the case came up on Thursday. The EFCC’s lawyer told the court that he understood that the Department of State Services (DSS) had completed its investigation and forwarded its report to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, but he had not yet received details of the outcome.
Omotosho said the disputed exhibit was particularly significant to the case because the court would have to consider it alongside other evidence in deciding whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the defendants.
“The exhibit in question constitutes one of the material pieces of evidence and is, in effect, one of the backbones of the prosecution’s case,” the judge said.
He explained that attaching little or no evidential value to the exhibit could create the impression that he was attempting to minimise the alleged tampering, while giving it substantial weight could also lead to perceptions that he was reacting to the incident.
The judge also noted that, after the alleged evidence-tampering incident, he had ordered the forfeiture of a property in Gwarimpa, Abuja, to the Federal Government. He said the forfeiture matter was related to the present case and the defendants, making his continued participation potentially subject to perceptions of bias.
Omotosho said the overriding consideration was that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.
“In the peculiar circumstances of this case, I consider it prudent to take a preventive approach,” he said.
He added: “If I were to continue with the proceedings and any further incident were to occur in relation to the case file or the exhibits, it could give rise to various perceptions and conclusions, whether justified or otherwise, which may adversely affect public confidence in the judiciary and the administration of justice.”
The judge consequently recused himself from further proceedings and directed that the case file be returned to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment to another judge.
EFCC had closed its case after calling 17 witnesses, while Bello and Sulaiman filed no-case submissions arguing that the prosecution had not presented sufficient evidence to require them to enter a defence. The matter will now be reassigned following Justice Omotosho’s withdrawal.
