Otudeko Says First Bank Loan Fully Paid as Onasanya Moves to Clear Name

Mr Onasanya’s appearance aligns with the commitment made by his lawyer, Mr Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika (SAN), when the matter first came up in court on January 20, 2025.

Another counsel for Mr Onasanya, Mr Olasupo Shashore (SAN), argued that although the former banker is determined to defend his innocence and clear his name, he aligns with the argument of Mr Otudeko’s lawyers, led by Mr Wole Olanipekun (SAN), that the court should first hear the preliminary application challenging its jurisdiction before proceeding with the case.

Mr Olanipekun informed the court the case is civil in nature because it concerns a bank-customer relationship and should not be treated as a criminal matter by the court.

The counsel to Anchorage Leisure Limited, Mr Ade Adedeji (SAN), supported Mr Olanipekun that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seemed determined to harass and intimidate his clients, despite the loan being fully repaid since 2017 and all parties having agreed to close the matter.

“We filed a preliminary objection, but the EFCC has yet to reply. The loan, which is the subject of prosecution, has long been repaid since 2017, when the EFCC initially waded into the matter.

“There is clear evidence of repayment available and the continued pursuit of this case by the EFCC amounts to nothing but witch-hunting, intimidation, and harassment of the defendants. It is baffling why a matter that was resolved many years ago is suddenly being resurrected,” he argued.

He said an application dated February 10, 2025, had been made, requesting the court to quash or decline jurisdiction over counts 1 to 10, alleging abuse of judicial process and a lack of prima facie evidence.

However, EFCC prosecutor, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), countered, stating that the allegations in the 13-count charge stemmed from a detailed investigation.

Following arguments from both parties, Justice Aneke adjourned the case to March 17, 2025, for ruling on the matter of jurisdiction.

Mr Fusika urged the court to allow his client to return home and appear in court on the next adjourned date, stating that Mr Onasanya had complied with the earlier assurance by presenting himself before the court as a mark of respect for the judicial process.

Justice Aneke granted the request, permitting Mr Onasanya to go home and return for the next hearing on the adjourned date.