Diezani’s lawyer attacks UK prosecution as bribery trial nears verdict
The defence and prosecution have concluded arguments in the ongoing bribery trial of former Nigerian petroleum minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, at the Southwark Crown Court in the United Kingdom.
Diezani is standing trial alongside oil executive Olatimbo Ayinde and her brother, Doye Agama, over a five-count charge related to alleged bribery. All three defendants have pleaded not guilty.
UK prosecutors accuse the former minister of accepting luxury gifts and high-end properties from oil industry figures seeking favourable treatment in oil contract allocations during her time in office between 2010 and 2015. Diezani and her legal team have consistently denied the allegations.
During Tuesday’s hearing, defence counsel Jonathan Laidlaw criticised the prosecution’s handling of the case, arguing that key individuals accused of offering bribes were never charged.
According to reports by THISDAY, Laidlaw questioned the fairness of prosecuting Diezani while the businessmen alleged to have paid bribes remained free.
He also challenged the quality of evidence presented by prosecutors, alleging that officials of the UK’s National Crime Agency were absent during a 2015 raid on Diezani’s Abuja residence and that items reportedly recovered were not photographed in their original positions.
The defence further claimed that important documents that could support Diezani’s case, including records of reimbursements and official ministerial documentation, had gone missing.
Laidlaw faulted the prosecution’s claim that no official records existed concerning the former minister’s movements and financial disbursements. He also criticised prosecutors for relying heavily on evidence from Nigeria’s anti-graft agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), while dismissing correspondence submitted by the agency in support of Ayinde as unreliable.
In response, lead prosecutor Alexandra Healy maintained that oil executives improperly financed Diezani’s lifestyle while benefiting from lucrative government contracts under her supervision.
Healy argued that it was inappropriate for a serving minister to receive financial benefits from business figures connected to state dealings. She rejected the defence’s claim that expenses had been reimbursed in Nigeria, saying no documentary proof had been presented and that such claims were absent from earlier police interviews.
The prosecution also referenced a £1 million payment allegedly linked to businessman Benedict Peters, describing the use of intermediary arrangements as an attempt to conceal the nature of the transaction.
The jury is expected to deliver its verdict later this week.
