Court grants Emefiele leave for forensic review of WhatsApp chats, iPhone evidence
Quick Read
The defence team, comprising seven lawyers and led by Olalekan Ojo, SAN, had filed and argued an application seeking permission to allow an independent forensic expert to inspect the handset and verify the authenticity of the WhatsApp messages extracted and presented as exhibits.
By Akin Kuponiyi
In his ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Rahman Oshodi, stated that the defence had the right to conduct an independent forensic review, provided safeguards are in place to preserve the integrity of the evidence.
Emefiele is standing trial alongside co-defendant Henry Omoile. They are accused of abuse of office, receiving gratification, accepting gifts through agents, and fraudulent property transactions involving $4.5 billion and ₦2.8 billion.
The defence team, comprising seven lawyers and led by Olalekan Ojo, SAN, had filed and argued an application seeking permission to allow an independent forensic expert to inspect the handset and verify the authenticity of the WhatsApp messages extracted and presented as exhibits.
Ojo told the court: “The defence is seeking the leave of the court to call a forensic expert to examine both the mobile device and printed conversations allegedly linked to the defendants.”
However, EFCC counsel C. C. Okezie opposed the application. She argued that the exhibits are in the custody of the court and must remain in their original state until the conclusion of the trial.
She also raised concerns over the defence’s failure to disclose the name of the forensic laboratory or the qualifications of the personnel who would handle the device. Okezie urged the court to allow the Director of the EFCC’s Forensic Department to select the laboratory and monitor the process, maintaining a strict chain of custody.
In his ruling, Justice Oshodi ordered that the forensic inspection should be carried out in the presence of representatives of all parties, each permitted to bring no more than one lawyer and one forensic expert of their choice.
He further directed that the exercise be supervised by a court-appointed representative, and take place between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. on September 24 and 26, 2025.
The judge emphasized that the chain of custody must be preserved, and that the exhibit must remain in the court’s custody at all times.
The case was subsequently adjourned to October 7, 8, and 9, 2025, for continuation of the trial.
Comments