EFCC Tells Court It Has No Evidence of $800000 Fraud Against Jude and Paul Okoye

Spread the love

Legal proceedings surrounding the long-running dispute within the former music group P-Square took a significant turn at the Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja. During a recent session, representatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) acknowledged before the court that they currently possess no documentary or forensic proof to support claims that Jude Okoye and Paul Okoye withdrew $800,000 belonging to the group.

The case emerged after singer Peter Okoye, one half of the once-popular twin duo, submitted a petition in 2024. In his complaint, Peter alleged that his elder brother Jude and twin brother Paul secretly handled large sums of money connected to the group’s business activities. He further claimed that several undisclosed bank accounts were used and that the ownership structure of Northside Entertainment Ltd. had been manipulated.

According to Gossip News Now reports that, the matter intensified when the anti-graft agency brought financial misconduct allegations against Jude Okoye, particularly relating to how the P-Square brand and its associated finances were managed over the years.

EFCC’s Position During Court Examination

While addressing the court during cross-examination, EFCC counsel M. K. Bashir told Justice Rahman Oshodi that the agency could not present records confirming the alleged $800,000 withdrawal. In essence, the counsel clarified that the claim originated from a witness statement rather than evidence gathered by investigators.

Bashir explained to the court that the commission cannot supply materials it does not possess, emphasizing that the burden of substantiating the allegation lies with the individual who made the claim.

The counsel also stated that the EFCC had no documentation verifying the existence of the alleged 47 bank accounts reportedly linked to the case. According to him, the claim about the accounts was mentioned by a witness, but the commission had not obtained any records confirming such accounts.

Dispute Over Timeline and Financial Records

Earlier testimony from Peter Okoye, delivered in May 2025, indicated that he had discovered evidence suggesting Jude and Paul shared over $800,000 withdrawn between March 2023 and October 2024. However, during questioning by defence lawyer Clement Onwuenwunor, SAN, Peter revised his statement, suggesting the transactions may have occurred much earlier, around 2013 to 2014.

This shift in the timeline became a major point of argument in court, with the defence questioning the reliability of the claim.

The defence team also requested that the court compel both Peter and the EFCC to submit documents linked to the alleged 47 bank accounts. However, Justice Oshodi ruled that such materials could only be demanded through a formal legal motion because they had not yet been officially admitted as evidence in the trial.

Controversy Over Ownership of Northside Entertainment

Another point of contention in the courtroom concerned the ownership structure of Northside Entertainment Ltd. Peter Okoye had alleged that Jude Okoye controlled 80 percent of the company’s shares.

Defence lawyers challenged this assertion by presenting records obtained from the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), which reportedly contradict Peter’s claim about the company’s share distribution.

Peter told the court that he only became aware of the existence of Northside Entertainment in 2024, after singer Cynthia Morgan shared a contract she signed through Jude Okoye. The contract, according to Peter, carried the company’s official letterhead.

He further explained that while Morgan initially signed under Northside Music, her albums were later released under Northside Inc., including its United States branch known as Northside Inc. (US).

Court Adjourns Proceedings

Following the exchanges between the prosecution, defence, and witnesses, Justice Oshodi adjourned the proceedings to December 12, 2025. The next session is expected to continue the trial while allowing both sides to present additional documentation relevant to the case.

Commentary and Analysis

The developments in this case highlight the complexities often associated with disputes involving family businesses and entertainment brands. In high-profile groups such as P-Square, financial management structures can become contentious once internal disagreements arise.

From a legal standpoint, the EFCC’s admission that it lacks documentary evidence on some of the central claims could influence how the case progresses. Courts typically rely on verifiable financial records, banking documentation, and forensic audits when evaluating allegations of financial misconduct.

Observers also note that the evolving timelines and disputed corporate records may play a critical role in determining the credibility of each side’s arguments. As the trial continues, the presentation of concrete documents could become the decisive factor in clarifying what truly happened behind the scenes of the once-celebrated music partnership.