The arraignment of United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc, and four others for an alleged N4.29bn foreign exchange fraud before Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja was, on Wednesday, June 3, 2026, stalled due to the absence of the defendants in court.
UBA, alongside Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited, was to be arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Lagos Zonal Directorate 1, on a four-count charge bordering on foreign exchange infractions, concealment of proceeds of unlawful activities, retention of criminal proceeds, and money laundering to the tune of N4.29bn.
One of the counts reads:
“That you, United Bank for Africa Plc, Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited, between 14th September, 2022 through 20th March, 2023 at Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired to sell Forex above the rates stipulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence.”
Another count reads: “That you, United Bank for Africa Plc, Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited, sometime in September 2022, at Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, concealed the aggregate sum of N4,290,112,796.72 (Four Billion, Two Hundred and Ninety Million, One Hundred and Twelve Thousand, Seven Hundred and Ninety-Six Naira, Seventy-Two Kobo) in your United Bank for Africa Account No. NGN09991931102 derived directly from your illegal act.”
When the matter was called for arraignment on Wednesday, the prosecution counsel, T. J. Banjo, announced his appearance. Adewale Kamourudeen appeared for the first, second and third defendants, while I. S. Hassan represented the fourth defendant.
There was no legal representation for the fifth defendant.
Addressing the court, Banjo stated that the matter was scheduled for a report on service of court processes and the arraignment of the defendants. According to him, all the defendants had been duly served with the charge and other court processes, adding that affidavits of service had already been filed before the court.
The prosecutor described the defendants’ absence as another attempt to frustrate the trial. He further submitted that the Commission had made efforts to arrest the second and third defendants after they allegedly jumped the administrative bail earlier granted to them by the EFCC.
Banjo further told the court that he was surprised by the defendants’ absence, despite the fact that they were served with the charge and relevant court processes. In response, counsel to the first, second and third defendants, Kamourudeen, maintained that his clients had not been served with either the information or any court processes relating to the case.
He argued that the defendants only became aware of the charge through media reports.
“The first, second and third defendants have not been served with the information or the hearing notice for today’s proceedings or the previous adjourned date. We got wind of it through newspaper reports. That is why we are here,” he said.
He added that he needed to examine the court’s file to ascertain the nature of the proof of service relied upon by the prosecution.
Responding, Banjo, however, dismissed the defence’s position, informing the court that UBA’s Compliance Officer, Chima Okugbo, received service on behalf of the bank and the two individual defendants, Akinyemi and Stephen. According to him, Okugbo had consistently represented the bank during the investigations and was also the person who accepted service on behalf of the two officials.
When Justice Oshodi asked the defence counsel whether he was willing to accept service on behalf of his clients, he declined, stating that he had no instructions to do so.
Thereafter, Justice Oshodi adjourned the matter till June 16, 2026 for a report on service, arraignment, and further proceedings.
