Witness Implicates Superior in Zenith Bank Embezzlement; Focus Shifts to Management

Witness Implicates Superior in Zenith Bank Embezzlement; Focus Shifts to Management

A significant development in the trial of two bankers accused of embezzling over Le 2 million from a telecommunications company has emerged, with a key prosecution witness suggesting his actions were carried out under the direct instruction of a superior. This testimony has introduced substantial doubt regarding the extent of the accused's culpability and the involvement of higher-ranking bank officials.

Hassan Fornah, 35, and Mohamed Tharm, 36, face charges including conspiracy to defraud, fraudulent conversion, and embezzlement under the Larceny Act of 1916. The allegations relate to the reported disappearance of Le 2,155,898.00 intended for deposit at Zenith Bank’s Bo Branch on behalf of the telecom giant Q-Cell.

During rigorous cross-examination by defense counsel M.B. Koroma, prosecution witness Morlia Bangura, a Zenith Bank teller, disclosed a critical detail: he was initially questioned by the police as a suspect, not merely a witness. Furthermore, Bangura admitted to an absence of specific knowledge regarding the charges faced by the defendants.

The teller clarified that his signing of a crucial financial document was done on the explicit order of the bank’s authorized signatory, asserting no involvement in the physical handling of the cash. He maintained that he simply followed instructions from his supervisor, who provided him with the relevant deposit slips, including those for Q-Cell. 

He also confirmed that his employment contract was comparable to those of the accused and that the bank had not conducted an internal investigation into the missing funds.

Following this revelation, defense counsel F.A. Kamara submitted a bail application for both defendants, characterizing them as "family men of potential personality" who would adhere to court mandates. However, Magistrate Fornah denied the application, remanding the accused until the subsequent court date scheduled for Tuesday, March 10, 2026.

The court proceedings have now shifted focus, raising serious questions about the potential complicity of senior bank management in the alleged scheme, as indicated by the witness's testimony. The case remains ongoing, with further hearings anticipated.