Goodluck Jonathan told a London court he personally approved Diezani's private jet use and that third-party payments for ministers on overseas duties were standard practice. The jury is now deciding. Was she innocent? Or does the evidence make the whole system guilty?

On Tuesday at Southwark Crown Court, a written statement from former President Goodluck Jonathan was read into the record. Jonathan told the court that it was not unusual for third parties to make payments on behalf of ministers on overseas duties. He confirmed he had personally approved Diezani Alison-Madueke's use of private jets on some foreign trips. "Any properly incurred incidental or in-kind assistance from third parties would be recorded and reimbursed where applicable," his statement said.

The same day, written statements from two oil tycoons named in the prosecution's case were also read to the court. Igho Sanomi and Kevin Okyere both denied paying bribes. Neither man appeared in person.

Diezani had finished nearly 11 days on the witness stand earlier that Tuesday. She's been consistent throughout. She was a rubber stamp, she told the court. She had limited control over contract approvals. Whatever was done for her in London was either official, reimbursed, or both.

The trial began on 26 January. It was originally scheduled to conclude by 24 April. It's still running. The jury is now deliberating. A verdict is expected in the coming days.

Jonathan's statement gives the defence its most credible witness and its most important argument. Not Diezani's word. Her boss's. If the president says third-party payments were normal, documented, and reimbursable, then the prosecution faces a harder task. It has to show that what happened in Diezani's case was categorically different in kind, not just in scale. The private jets weren't unusual, Jonathan is saying. He approved some of them himself.

The prosecution's answer will be the intercepted phone calls. On those recordings, Diezani advised Kola Aluko on how to manage the optics of his spending. She knew about the yacht. She was actively steering the risk management of the very lifestyle the prosecution says she received as bribes. An innocent person who simply accepted officially sanctioned help doesn't coach the person providing it on how to avoid scrutiny.

Both things sit in front of the jury right now. The president saying it was normal. The recordings showing she knew it needed to look like it wasn't.

What makes Jonathan's statement more than a legal manoeuvre is what it reveals about the administration they both served. Third-party payments were normal enough for the president to sign off on. Ministers routinely received assistance from contractors. If the system ran this way, then Diezani's case isn't an exception to how Jonathan-era Nigeria worked. It's an illustration of it.

The jury is deciding whether she's guilty. Nobody is deciding that question about the system.

One night at The Savoy or The Dorchester costs around £2,500. Nigeria's national minimum wage is ₦70,000 a month. Diezani reportedly spent multiple evenings at hotels like those. The president called it normal.