Nigerian investor sold his late father’s land to join $87 million crypto scheme, court hears

Two investors have told a Federal High Court in Abuja they trusted Afriq Arbitrage System because its founder repeatedly assured them their money “cannot be touched”, with one saying he sold inherited family land to invest, in the trial of Jesam Michael Ubi over an alleged $87 million crypto fraud.

According to information attributed to Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) spokesman Dele Oyewole, the testimony was heard before Justice Obiora Egwuatu as part of the ongoing prosecution of Ubi over an alleged $87 million cryptocurrency investment fraud. The allegations remain before the court, and the defendant’s guilt has not been established.

AAS crypto fraud witnesses detail their investment losses

Samson Egbu, the 25th prosecution witness, told the court that he invested 8,190 USDT in the Afriq Arbitrage System. Led in evidence by prosecution counsel Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, Egbu said he was encouraged to invest by assurances that customers’ funds would be protected on the Binance platform.

According to his testimony, Ubi repeatedly assured investors that their money could not be accessed by other people. Egbu said these assurances helped persuade him that his investment was secure.

“He repeatedly told us that your money cannot be touched,” Egbu told the court.

His testimony placed the security assurances at the centre of the AAS crypto fraud allegations, with the prosecution seeking to establish how the platform attracted investors and what they were told before committing their money.

The second witness, Isaac Kwaghbee, an Abuja-based businessman, told the court that he invested 7,000 USDT through two separate accounts. His investment, he said, came from proceeds generated by selling family land inherited from his late father.

Kwaghbee explained that he sold the property in the hope of generating additional income for himself and his siblings. The platform’s advertised returns influenced his decision to invest, according to his testimony.

Together, the investments described by the two witnesses amounted to 15,190 USDT. Their accounts added to the evidence being presented in the case against Ubi, whose platform has since collapsed.

Promised returns and Binance security claims under scrutiny

The prosecution alleged that Ubi promoted the investment platform by offering investors a return of 1.6 per cent within 24 hours. Such a promise of rapid returns formed part of the investment proposition that allegedly attracted participants to the scheme.

According to the allegations outlined in court, promotional material also included videos, photographs said to depict a United States head office and celebrity endorsements. The prosecution’s case centres on whether the representations made to investors and the operation of the platform were part of an alleged fraudulent investment arrangement.

The AAS crypto fraud proceedings are examining not only the losses reported by individual investors but also the claims that helped persuade people to participate. Egbu’s testimony focused on assurances that investors’ money would remain protected, while Kwaghbee described how the prospect of earning additional income led him to commit proceeds from a family property sale.

The platform’s collapse has left questions about the circumstances surrounding its failure and the responsibility of those involved in its operation. According to the report presented in the case, Ubi has reportedly blamed an individual identified as Oluwasesan Abayomi for the platform’s failure.

That allegation has not, in itself, established responsibility for the reported losses. The court proceedings will determine the relevant evidence and consider the competing positions advanced by the prosecution and defence.

For investors, the testimonies illustrate the financial consequences they say followed their participation in the platform. For the prosecution, the accounts may help explain how the investment arrangement was marketed and why customers believed their funds would be safe.

Defence challenges evidence in AAS crypto fraud trial

During the proceedings, defence counsel Uchena Njoku, SAN, objected to the admission of documents tendered through the prosecution witnesses. He reserved his reasons for the objections, according to the report.

During cross-examination, Njoku questioned Kwaghbee about his use of a second account on a different website. He also challenged the witnesses to acknowledge that their investments had initially generated the returns promised by the platform.

The defence’s line of questioning raised the possibility that the platform’s operations changed after the investments had begun yielding returns. Counsel challenged the witnesses to accept that the platform was allegedly manipulated by someone other than Ubi.

These exchanges are significant to the AAS crypto fraud case because they point to issues the court may need to examine, including how the platform operated, whether investors initially received returns and what ultimately caused the collapse.

However, the defence’s questions and suggestions are not findings of fact. The prosecution must establish its allegations through admissible evidence, while the defendant retains the right to challenge the evidence and present his defence.

The objections to the documents tendered by the prosecution also leave evidentiary issues to be addressed as the trial progresses. The court’s consideration of those issues will form part of the wider process of determining the facts surrounding the alleged investment fraud.

Court adjourns AAS crypto fraud proceedings until December

Justice Obiora Egwuatu adjourned the case until December 2, 2026, for continuation of the trial.

The next hearing is expected to form part of the continuing judicial process in which the prosecution presents its case and the defence challenges the evidence against Ubi. The proceedings concern allegations of an $87 million cryptocurrency investment fraud, although the two witnesses discussed in the latest hearing reported combined investments of 15,190 USDT.

The AAS crypto fraud trial has drawn attention to the assurances, advertised returns and promotional methods that allegedly influenced investors’ decisions. Egbu’s account focused on claims that customers’ funds could not be touched, while Kwaghbee’s testimony highlighted the personal financial decisions he made in pursuit of additional income.

Their evidence also underscores the importance of distinguishing between an investment platform’s advertised promises and the protections that investors can independently verify. Claims of high returns and assurances about the security of funds do not, by themselves, establish that an investment is safe.

For now, the case remains before the Federal High Court in Abuja. The allegations against Ubi, the defence’s challenges and the evidence presented by witnesses will be considered through the judicial process.

The December 2 hearing will provide the next opportunity for the trial to continue as the court examines the circumstances surrounding the platform’s collapse and the alleged losses suffered by investors.