No Evidence Linking Abba Kyari to Alleged Drug Trafficker Through Call Records, Defence Witness Testifies in Court

In a major development in the ongoing high-profile drug case involving the suspended Deputy Commissioner of Police, Abba Kyari, a defence witness has testified that there is no call data evidence connecting Kyari to an alleged cocaine dealer known by the alias “Mike Coke.”

The testimony came on Thursday at the Federal High Court in Abuja, where the court is presiding over a case filed by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) accusing Kyari and several others of involvement in the tampering and trafficking of a large quantity of cocaine. The case, which has drawn considerable national attention, centers on the alleged handling of 17.55 kilograms of cocaine that the NDLEA claims were seized and unlawfully interfered with by the defendants.

Adeshina Fasasi, the defence witness in question, appeared in court under subpoena and introduced himself as a member of the technical team affiliated with MTN Nigeria Communications Plc. Fasasi’s role, he explained, involves managing cases related to customer data requests, which often include inquiries from law enforcement agencies. He specifically works in the Incident Management Unit, handling tasks related to both consumer complaints and investigations requested by regulatory or legal authorities.

While giving his testimony before Justice Emeka Nwite, Fasasi stated that he had conducted a review of call records associated with phone numbers linked to Kyari. According to his analysis, none of those records showed any communication or call logs with a phone number that could be identified as belonging to or associated with the person nicknamed “Mike Coke.” This revelation could play a crucial role in the defence strategy of Kyari, who has continued to maintain his innocence in the face of these serious accusations.

Fasasi also confirmed that of the six mobile phone numbers examined in connection with Kyari, only one of those numbers was officially registered under his name. He emphasized that the absence of a number saved under the name “Coke” in the data provided by MTN does not necessarily mean the contact does not exist on Kyari’s mobile device. However, he clarified that MTN’s data system does not have the capacity to extract contact names or view details from messaging platforms such as WhatsApp. Instead, the system is limited to capturing voice call metadata, text message records, device types, and basic location information related to the usage of the SIM cards.

During his testimony, Fasasi acknowledged the existence of one number, 09136976496, which was labeled as “Coke” in a separate section of the case file. However, upon reviewing the registration data, he confirmed that this number is linked to an individual identified as Ruth Ayuba and not to Kyari or any of his known associates. This detail adds a layer of complexity to the prosecution’s claim that Kyari had direct contact with drug traffickers through mobile communication.

He also clarified that MTN does not retain or record the content of any phone conversations between its users. Even under official requests by law enforcement, the company can only provide the technical metadata of calls and messages, but not the audio content or conversations themselves.

During cross-examination by Joseph Sunday, the prosecuting counsel representing the NDLEA, Fasasi admitted that he is not a direct employee of MTN Nigeria. He works instead as part of a managed services team contracted by the telecoms provider. Although his work is recognized and authorized by MTN, he operates as a third-party support staff member rather than an internal employee. He also conceded that he had not read the entire report submitted as evidence in the court and therefore could not testify comprehensively about every detail contained within the document.

Justice Emeka Nwite, after hearing the testimony and cross-examination, adjourned the matter for further proceedings. The court scheduled the continuation of the defence for October 22, when additional evidence and testimonies are expected to be presented.

The NDLEA had initially brought charges against Kyari and six others in March 2022. According to the agency, the defendants were allegedly involved in tampering with 21.35 kilograms of cocaine that were previously confiscated from individuals suspected of trafficking the illegal substance. Among the original co-defendants were four other police officers identified as Sunday Ubia, Bawa James, Simon Agirigba, and John Nuhu. Two civilians, Chibunna Patrick Umeibe and Emeka Alphonsus Ezenwanne, were also charged in the same case.

While the police officers have consistently pleaded not guilty to all charges, the two civilian defendants admitted to possessing the narcotics. They entered into a plea agreement with the NDLEA and were each sentenced to two years in prison by Justice Nwite on June 14, 2022.

Throughout the trial, the prosecution presented several witnesses who testified to the alleged tampering of the seized cocaine. Some of these testimonies asserted that Kyari and his co-defendants altered the evidence to benefit themselves and possibly cover up illicit dealings.

Earlier in the year, Justice Nwite rejected the no-case submissions filed by Kyari and the other defendants, effectively ruling that there was sufficient evidence on record to warrant them entering their defence. This ruling cleared the way for the defence to begin calling its witnesses and mounting its arguments.

Kyari, once celebrated for his leadership in high-profile criminal investigations, has seen his career and public image severely damaged by the case. The allegations have drawn widespread attention both within Nigeria and internationally, highlighting concerns over corruption and misconduct within law enforcement agencies.

As the trial continues, the defence will seek to dismantle the NDLEA’s claims, pointing to evidence such as Fasasi’s testimony to argue that Kyari had no verifiable contact with key figures in the alleged drug trafficking operation. The prosecution, on the other hand, is expected to challenge these assertions and provide further evidence to support their narrative.

The case remains one of the most closely watched legal proceedings in recent Nigerian history, not only because of the weight of the allegations but also because of the involvement of a once-respected figure within the country’s police force. The outcome could set a significant precedent for how allegations of criminal misconduct by top law enforcement officers are handled in the future.