The trial of former Nigerian Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke entered its 24th day at Southwark Crown Court in London with heightened intensity, as prosecutors pressed hard on an allegation involving a $100,000 cash withdrawal said to have been delivered to a property linked to the former minister, a charge she flatly and firmly denied before the jury.
Proceedings began later than scheduled due to transport disruptions caused by a London Tube strike, before moving into detailed jury questions and extended cross-examination focused on financial movements, cash transactions, the use of intermediaries, and luxury spending at high-end retailers.
Alison-Madueke firmly denied any knowledge of the alleged $100,000 cash sum, telling the court she only became aware of the allegation during the disclosure process in the ongoing criminal proceedings.
“No, it was not for me,” she told the court directly when asked whether the cash was intended for her personal use, insisting she had no involvement in the transaction or its delivery and rejecting any connection between herself and the funds.
The prosecution argued that the cash withdrawal formed part of a wider and deliberate pattern of indirect financial transactions connected to properties and luxury spending associated with the former minister. The defence countered that such indirect associations were insufficient to establish knowledge, control, or criminal wrongdoing.
Prosecutors also revisited claims involving luxury purchases at Harrods, including high-value transactions said to be linked to businessman Kola Aluko. Alison-Madueke accepted that a £1,400 Prada handbag had been purchased for her but denied knowledge or authorization of several other transactions, maintaining that various associates may have acted independently without her instruction.
“It didn’t have to be Aluko,” she said, adding that multiple individuals were involved in different financial and logistical arrangements during the period under examination.
When questioned about why high-end items allegedly purchased as gifts remained in her possession after leaving public office, she told the jury that the property in question was shared among family members and that items found there could not automatically be attributed to her personal ownership.
Further questioning examined the role of personal assistants and associates alleged to have processed payments across multiple credit cards and accounts. Alison-Madueke said she did not manage such financial details and was not involved in reimbursement processes. On property matters, she rejected claims that London residences were acquired or maintained for her benefit, describing her role as purely advisory rather than operational.
Throughout the session, prosecutors relied heavily on documentary evidence including emails, invoices, and transaction records, while Alison-Madueke repeatedly indicated she could not recall detailed events from more than a decade ago without supporting documentation. The trial continues.
