A Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja has admitted a certified copy of a Supreme Court judgment concerning forfeited assets linked to former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, in his ongoing trial over alleged financial misconduct involving $4.5 billion and ₦2.8 billion.
Justice Rahman Oshodi admitted the document as Exhibit L on Friday, November 13, after rejecting objections raised by Emefiele's defence counsel.
The ruling represents another development in the high-profile prosecution of the former CBN governor, who is facing a 19-count charge bordering on alleged gratification, corrupt demands and abuse of office during his time at the apex bank.
However, the judge made an important clarification: although the Supreme Court judgment was admissible as a public document, it could only be used to establish what the Supreme Court had previously decided. It could not be treated as evidence for or against Emefiele or any other defendant in the ongoing criminal trial.
Court Overrules Emefiele's Defence Objection
The prosecution, led by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, sought to introduce the certified Supreme Court judgment through an Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) investigator, Alvan Gurumnaan.
Emefiele's lead defence counsel, Ojo Olalekan, SAN, opposed the application, arguing that the document should not be admitted in its present form.
One of the defence's objections concerned the signatures on the judgment. Counsel argued that the copy presented before the trial court was signed by only four justices, raising questions about its completeness and admissibility.
The defence also argued that the judgment originated from non-conviction-based asset forfeiture proceedings and should not be used to support the prosecution's allegations in the separate criminal case.
However, the prosecution maintained that the document was a properly certified public record and satisfied the requirements of Sections 102 and 104 of Nigeria's Evidence Act.
In his ruling, Justice Oshodi held that a certified true copy of a Supreme Court judgment qualified as a public document and could therefore be admitted.
The judge also rejected the argument that presenting only the lead judgment made the document incomplete or inadmissible.
Judge Restricts How the Judgment Can Be Used
Despite admitting the document, Justice Oshodi placed clear limits on its use in the ongoing criminal proceedings.
The judge explained that a previous court judgment could be tendered to establish what was decided in that particular case. However, its admission did not automatically make the findings in the earlier proceedings proof of criminal responsibility in the new trial.
He therefore ruled that the Supreme Court judgment could not constitute evidence for or against any of the defendants in the ongoing case.
This distinction is significant because the forfeiture proceedings and the criminal prosecution are separate legal processes.
The admission of the judgment does not mean that Emefiele has been convicted of the offences currently before the Ikeja court.
The prosecution must still establish its allegations through evidence presented and tested during the criminal trial.
Supreme Court Had Upheld Forfeiture of Properties and $2.045 Million
The judgment admitted by the trial court relates to an earlier Supreme Court decision concerning assets linked to Emefiele.
On July 17, 2026, the Supreme Court overturned an earlier Court of Appeal decision that had set aside a Federal High Court order granting the final forfeiture of the assets to the Federal Government.
The apex court consequently restored the forfeiture order issued by the Federal High Court on November 1, 2024.
The affected assets included seven properties, approximately $2.045 million and share certificates associated with Queensdorf Global Fund Limited.
The forfeiture proceedings were pursued by the EFCC as part of its investigation into assets allegedly connected to the former CBN governor.
The Supreme Court's decision concerned the ownership and forfeiture of those assets. It should not be confused with a criminal conviction in the separate case involving alleged gratification, corrupt demands and abuse of office.
EFCC Witness Makes Allegations About Properties Acquired Through Associates
The latest courtroom development follows testimony by EFCC investigator Alvan Gurumnaan, who previously appeared as the prosecution's eighth witness.
During proceedings on November 12, Gurumnaan told the court that investigations had identified several properties allegedly acquired through associates and linked to Emefiele.
The witness reportedly listed properties in Lagos, Delta, Ogun and Abuja, including twin duplexes in Lekki Phase 1, mansions on Queens Drive in Ikoyi, an unfinished factory in Agbor, Delta State, and a warehouse in Ogun State.
He also referred to 94 luxury flats under construction, an industrial park and a residential development in Abuja containing more than 700 houses.
According to the investigator, the properties were identified during investigations into assets allegedly acquired beyond what Emefiele could have legitimately earned while serving as CBN governor.
The defence challenged parts of the testimony, arguing that some of the properties mentioned were not included in the charges before the court.
These claims remain allegations presented by the prosecution and have not, merely by being introduced in court, established criminal guilt.
Emefiele Faces 19 Counts, While Co-Defendant Faces Three Charges
Emefiele is standing trial on a 19-count charge involving alleged gratification, corrupt demands, abuse of office and financial transactions said to involve approximately $4.5 billion and ₦2.8 billion.
His co-defendant, Henry Omoile, is facing a separate three-count charge bordering on the alleged unlawful acceptance of gifts.
The prosecution alleges that the former CBN governor used his position and intermediaries to obtain financial benefits and acquire assets through questionable transactions.
Both defendants have denied the allegations and are entitled to the presumption of innocence unless proven guilty by a competent court.
The EFCC has presented witnesses and documentary evidence as part of its effort to establish the charges. The defence has also challenged aspects of the prosecution's case and continues to exercise its right to cross-examine witnesses and contest evidence.
What the Latest Ruling Means for the Trial
The admission of the Supreme Court judgment is a procedural development that allows the earlier court decision to become part of the record in the ongoing proceedings.
However, Justice Oshodi's restriction means the prosecution cannot simply rely on the forfeiture judgment as proof that Emefiele committed the criminal offences for which he is being tried.
The prosecution will still have to prove the elements of the charges against each defendant using admissible evidence.
The distinction is important in a case involving substantial financial allegations, multiple properties, alleged intermediaries and previous civil forfeiture proceedings.
The ruling also demonstrates that the admissibility of a document and the weight or purpose for which it can be used are separate legal questions.
Trial Continues as Nigeria Watches High-Profile CBN Case
The case against Emefiele remains one of Nigeria's closely watched financial-crime prosecutions because of his former position as head of the country's central bank and the scale of the allegations.
Emefiele served as CBN governor from 2014 until 2023, a period during which Nigeria experienced major monetary and foreign-exchange policy changes.
His prosecution has attracted significant public attention, particularly because the allegations involve billions of dollars and naira, properties across different parts of the country and claims about the use of intermediaries.
The latest ruling does not conclude the case or determine whether the former CBN governor is guilty.
Instead, the court has allowed the certified Supreme Court judgment to be admitted for the limited purpose of confirming the outcome of the earlier forfeiture proceedings.
The criminal trial will continue, with the prosecution expected to present its case and the defence retaining the right to challenge the evidence.
For now, the central question before the Ikeja court remains whether the EFCC can establish its allegations against Emefiele and his co-defendant beyond reasonable doubt.