Usman Yusuf trial: Witness claims NHIA vehicle contract ignored due process

Fresh revelations emerged on Thursday in the ongoing trial of former National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA) boss, Usman Yusuf, as a prosecution witness told the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Kuchiako, Kuje, Abuja, that a vehicle supply contract awarded during his tenure did not follow due procurement procedures.

James Balami, Director of Procurement at the National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA) and the second prosecution witness (PW2), made the disclosure before Justice Chinyere E. Nwecheonwu during proceedings on May 14, 2026.

Led in evidence by prosecution counsel Francis Usani, Balami told the court that a contract for the supply of vehicles was awarded to Lubekh Nigeria Ltd under Yusuf’s leadership without being subjected to the agency’s procurement process.

According to him, the contract originated from the Human Resources Department and was routed directly to the then Chief Executive Officer and Accounting Officer, Professor Yusuf, effectively sidelining the Procurement Department.

“It emanated from the Human Resources to the Chief Executive Officer, Professor Yusuf, as at that time. So, it did not go through procurement and by implication it did not go through procurement process,” the witness said.

Balami explained that although Lubekh Nigeria Ltd submitted documents that were evaluated and deemed technically and financially responsive, the proper procedural channels were not followed.

READ ALSO: EFCC charges Bank executive, co-defendant in alleged N39m fraud case

When asked about the value of the contract, he said he could not recall the exact figure but mentioned that one of the contracts was valued at about N9 million.

The court also heard that Lubekh Nigeria Ltd is owned by Kabiru Yusuf Yar’adua, whom the witness described as a businessman and brother to the defendant.

“Kabiru Yusuf Yar’adua is a business man and owner of Lubekh company and a brother to the defendant, Professor Yusuf, who was the then chief executive,” Balami testified.

He further disclosed that Hassan Khalifa Yusuf — the son of Kabiru Yusuf Yar’adua and nephew to the defendant — evaluated the contract awarded to Lubekh Nigeria Ltd. Hassan, he said, was at the time a seconded staff member of the Authority.

“Hassan Khalifa Yusuf is the son of the owner of Lubekh Nig Ltd,” the witness added.

Balami told the court that Lubekh Nigeria Ltd, Zaramat Global Company Ltd and GK Kanki Foundation were among the entities for which the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had requested information from the NHIA.

He also revealed that several petitions had been filed against Yusuf, alleging maladministration and procurement breaches. The petitions, he said, were sent to the EFCC, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Federal Ministry of Health and the Presidency.

“There were a series of petitions against Professor Yusuf… bordering on maladministration and procurement breaches,” Balami told the court.

He stated that two investigative panels were set up to probe the allegations — a ministerial panel and a separate presidential panel — and that he was invited to appear before both.

During the proceedings, defence counsel O.I. Habeeb, SAN, objected to the witness’ oral evidence concerning the petitions and panel proceedings, arguing that such evidence was irrelevant to the charges before the court.

Justice Nwecheonwu, however, dismissed the objection, stating: “I don’t think he has exceeded his boundaries.”

Under cross-examination, the witness addressed Exhibit B, which he described as a schedule of contracts considered and approved by the Tenders Board. The exhibit referenced N80 million — comprising N30 million in 2015 and N50 million in 2016 — budgeted for the purchase of a Prado SUV.

Balami clarified that Exhibit B was not an appropriation or an approved budget but merely a schedule of contracts presented to the Tenders Board.

When asked whether the Tenders Board had the authority to approve the contract award based on Exhibit B, he replied: “Yes, my lord, based on Exhibit B, they have no authority to approve the award.”

Justice Nwecheonwu adjourned the matter to October 14 and 15, 2026, for continuation of cross-examination and further hearing.