The Federal High Court in Abuja has  fixed December 12 to deliver ruling in the admissibility of six different statements which allegedly  implicated a former Attorney General of the Federation AGF and Minister of Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke in the alleged $1.1B Malabu Oil fraud.

The court  fixed the date after taking arguments from Wole Olanipekun,  SAN, Counsel to  Adoke in the trial and  Ofem Uket counsel to  the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission,  EFCC.

The six statements in dispute were made on different days by an Oil magnate, Aliyu Abubakar who is standing trial alongside Adoke in the alleged multi-billion dollars oil fraud.

Olanipekun, SAN  while adopting his final address in the trial- within- trial on the admissibility of the statements told the court that the disputed statements were made in gross violation of section 17 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015.

Whlie canvassing that the statements be thrown out for being worthless,  Olanipekun, SAN also  argued that the EFCC coerced the maker of the statements to implicate his client in the alleged multi- billion dollars oil fraud at all costs.

 Olanipekun, SAN also argued that the blunder of the EFCC during the  investigations into the alleged fraud was monumental and has no precedent in law.

The legal practitioner told the court  that the operative of EFCC,one  Bala Sanga, who was deeply involved in the investigation of the statements maker and who was involved in the recording of the statements, ended up as prosecutor of the same person he interrogated.

The maker of the disputed statements and oil magnate, Abubakar Aliyu had in the course of his trial along with Adoke alleged that five EFCC operatives who subjected him to interrogation caused him to make the implicating statements under duress.

He alleged that he was asked to implicate former President Goodluck Jonathan and Mohammed  Adoke so as to be set free from being prosecuted.

Aliyu alleged that he was severely harrassed, molested and threatened before he succumbed to the duress.

He also alleged that some of the statements were recorded on his behalf by the operatives of the anti-graft agency.