Court Orders Former Nigerian Power Minister to Defend ₦33.8bn Fraud Charges
A Nigerian federal court has rejected a bid by Saleh Mamman, the country's former Minister of Power, to avoid defending himself against allegations of misappropriating ₦33.8 billion ($76 million) meant for hydroelectric projects. The decision by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja means Mamman must now answer to 12 counts of money laundering and conspiracy brought by Nigeria's anti-corruption agency.
Background and Context
The charges stem from Mamman's tenure as Power Minister under former President Muhammadu Buhari's administration, focusing on funds allocated for the Zungeru and Mambilla Hydro Electric Power projects. These infrastructure initiatives represent Nigeria's ambitions to expand its electricity generation capacity through renewable sources. The Federal Ministry of Power oversees the country's transition toward meeting growing energy demands, with hydroelectric projects forming a cornerstone of this strategy.
Corruption within Nigeria's power sector has long plagued development efforts, with previous investigations revealing systemic issues in contract awards and project fund management. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has intensified scrutiny of former government officials as part of broader anti-corruption initiatives that have gathered momentum since 2015.
Key Figures and Entities
Saleh Mamman, who pleaded not guilty during his July 2024 arraignment, served as Nigeria's Power Minister from 2019 to 2022. The case against him was brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Nigeria's primary anti-corruption agency established in 2003. The EFCC alleges Mamman conspired with ministry officials and private companies to divert funds through indirect conversion schemes.
The judicial proceedings are overseen by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja. In dismissing the no-case submission, the judge referenced constitutional provisions guaranteeing the right to defense while noting that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to warrant a response. The court's decision aligns with similar rulings in high-profile corruption cases involving Nigerian officials.
Legal and Financial Mechanisms
The legal strategy employed by Mamman's defense team—a no-case submission—represents a common procedural maneuver in Nigerian criminal trials. Under Section 36 of Nigeria's 1999 Constitution, defendants maintain the right to challenge whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case before presenting their defense. Justice Omotosho's ruling emphasizes that this threshold was met based on the EFCC's presentation of 17 witnesses and 43 exhibits.
The financial mechanisms at issue involve alleged money laundering and conspiracy structures designed to obscure the diversion of public funds. Prosecutors contend that ministry resources earmarked for critical infrastructure projects were instead rerouted through complex transactions involving corporate entities and intermediaries. Such schemes typically exploit gaps in Nigeria's financial monitoring systems, though recent reforms have strengthened anti-money laundering regulations and reporting requirements.
International Implications and Policy Response
The case highlights ongoing challenges in Nigeria's fight against corruption, particularly in sectors receiving significant public investment and international development financing. The outcome may influence future foreign direct investment decisions in Nigeria's power sector, which remains critical to the country's economic development goals. International partners, including the World Bank and African Development Bank, have consistently emphasized governance reforms as conditions for infrastructure funding.
Domestically, the proceeding represents a test of Nigeria's judicial independence in handling cases involving high-ranking former officials. The Nigerian Bar Association and civil society organizations have closely monitored such trials as indicators of the country's commitment to rule of law. The EFCC's continued pursuit of this case, despite procedural challenges, reflects sustained governmental emphasis on anti-corruption efforts under current leadership.
Sources
This report is based on court proceedings at the Federal High Court, Abuja, official statements from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, and public records regarding Nigeria's hydroelectric power projects. Additional context was drawn from constitutional provisions governing criminal procedure in Nigeria and historical coverage of corruption cases in the country's energy sector.
