Alleged N6bn Money Laundering: Court Faults Mompha’s Lawyer Over Delay Tactics
By Naija Enquirer Staff
Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, on Monday frowned at what she described as “delay tactics” allegedly being employed by Ismaila Mustapha, popularly known as Mompha, through his lawyer, Kolawole Salami, in his ongoing N6 billion money laundering trial.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Lagos Zonal Directorate 1, Ikoyi, had on January 12, 2022, arraigned Mustapha and his company, Ismalob Global Investment Limited, on an eight-count charge bordering on conspiracy to launder funds obtained through unlawful activities, retention of proceeds of criminal conduct, failure to disclose assets, and possession of documents containing false pretences.
Charges Against the Defendant
One of the counts alleges that Mustapha, alongside Ahmadu Mohammed (at large) and Ismalob Global Investment Limited, conspired in 2016 to conduct financial transactions amounting to N5,998,884,653.18 with the intent of promoting unlawful activities, specifically obtaining money by false pretence.
Mompha pleaded not guilty to the charges, leading to the commencement of full trial proceedings.
No-Case Submission Dismissed
During the trial, the prosecution counsel, S. I. Suleiman, called five witnesses and tendered several documents, all of which were admitted in evidence before the prosecution closed its case.
The defence subsequently filed a no-case submission, arguing that no evidence sufficiently linked the defendants to the alleged offences.
However, in a ruling delivered on November 4, 2025, Justice Dada held that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the defendants. The court dismissed the no-case submission and ordered the defence to open its case.
Application to Appeal
At the resumed hearing, defence counsel Kolawole Salami informed the court that the defendants had filed an application seeking leave to appeal the November 4 ruling.
Salami argued that his clients were dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision and maintained that no prima facie case had been established to warrant entering a defence. He expressed confidence that the appellate court would overturn the ruling.
The prosecution counsel, Suleiman, opposed the application, stating that the matter had been adjourned since 2025 specifically for the defence to open its case. He noted that the trial had been ongoing since 2021 and urged the court to direct the defendants to proceed.
Court Warns Against Further Delays
Justice Dada ruled that filing an appeal is the constitutional right of the defendants but directed the defence to proceed with its case, adding that the appeal application could be addressed after the day’s proceedings.
However, defence counsel informed the court that he was unable to produce his witness, explaining that the witness was unaware of the hearing date and was outside the court’s jurisdiction.
He sought an adjournment, assuring the court that the witness would be present at the next sitting.
Justice Dada granted the adjournment but warned that the court would not tolerate further delay tactics, describing the extension as the “last indulgence.”
The matter was subsequently adjourned until April 28, 2026, for continuation of trial.
