Mompha Pushes Back Against Ruling in Alleged N6bn Laundering Case

Social media personality, Ismaila Mustapha, widely known as Mompha, has challenged a ruling of the Ikeja Special Offences Court in Lagos over the alleged N6 billion money laundering case instituted against him.

According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), Mompha is standing trial alongside his company, Ismalob Global Investment Limited, on an eight-count charge bordering on conspiracy to launder unlawfully obtained funds, retention of proceeds of crime, and failure to disclose assets.

He was arraigned on January 12, 2022, and is currently being tried in absentia.

At Monday’s proceedings, defence counsel, Kolawole Salami, informed the court that the defendants had filed an application seeking leave to appeal the court’s November 4, 2025 ruling, which dismissed their no-case submission.

Salami explained that the defendants were dissatisfied with the decision, maintaining that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case requiring them to open their defence. He expressed optimism that the appellate court would overturn the ruling and uphold their no-case submission. He further assured the court of their commitment to diligently pursue the appeal and urged that the application be granted in the interest of justice.

Counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Suleiman Suleiman, opposed the application, stating that the matter was scheduled for the defence to commence its case. He noted that the trial had been ongoing since 2021 and adjourned since 2025 for the defence to open its case.

According to him, the defence had sufficient time to prepare and should proceed rather than introduce fresh applications at this stage.

Responding, Salami maintained that the appeal application had been filed and served on the prosecution since November 26, 2025.

In her ruling, Justice Mojisola Dada directed the defence to proceed with its case, noting that while filing an appeal is the constitutional right of the defendants, the court would continue with the day’s proceedings.

“You are aware of today’s proceedings. You have the right to appeal. It is your constitutional right,” the judge stated.

However, the defence counsel informed the court that he was unable to present his witness, explaining that the witness was unaware of the hearing date and was currently outside the court’s jurisdiction. He requested an adjournment, assuring the court that the witness would be available at the next hearing.

The court cautioned against delay tactics and described the adjournment as the final indulgence.