The dispute over ₦750.37 million belonging to KudiWave Technologies has escalated, with supporters of the fintech company moving from the Nigeria Police Force headquarters in Abuja to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), demanding answers over the whereabouts of the funds.
Dressed in solemn attire and carrying placards reading “IGP Save Our Business,” “PalmPay and PSFU Return Our N750m” and “KudiWave Is Not A Fraudulent Organisation,” the protesters called for the release of the money and rejected allegations linking the company to fraudulent transactions.
The demonstration comes after months of legal and regulatory disputes involving KudiWave, PalmPay and the Police Special Fraud Unit (PSFU).
What happened to the ₦750 million?
KudiWave says ₦750,369,439.04 was moved from its PalmPay account on July 15, 2026, while the company was challenging a court order that had restricted its account.
The company subsequently obtained a Federal High Court ruling on July 22 setting aside, vacating and discharging the earlier order and directing the removal of restrictions on its account.
That sequence is at the centre of KudiWave's complaint.
The company argues that its challenge had already been heard before the disputed transfer occurred and that the money should therefore be investigated, traced and accounted for.
PalmPay gives a different explanation.
The fintech company says it transferred the funds because it had received a June 29 Federal High Court order directing the movement of the money to a designated Police Recovery Account.
PalmPay maintains that the order remained valid and enforceable when the transfer was made on July 15. It says it subsequently notified the police of the July 22 ruling and requested that the funds be returned.
KudiWave rejects the fraud narrative
KudiWave is also challenging the basis on which the funds were allegedly connected to a wider “round-tripping” investigation.
In a September 14 petition to the Inspector-General of Police, the company disputed the Police Special Fraud Unit's account that the money was connected to transactions involving Master Solution Concept, Kredilink Technologies, Nexall Technologies and other entities.
KudiWave says it received the money from Nexall as part of what it describes as a legitimate commercial transaction involving corresponding digital-asset value.
It is asking investigators to reconstruct the entire transaction chain rather than simply label the ₦750 million as suspicious.
That distinction matters.
A suspicious transaction is not automatically proof of fraud. The source of the money, the contractual relationships between the companies, the transaction records and the ultimate beneficiary all need to be established through evidence.
Then there is the PalmPay question
One of the most contentious issues is where exactly the money went.
KudiWave alleges that the court order contemplated movement of the funds into a specified police account but that its transaction records showed the money being transferred to an Access Bank business account.
PalmPay disputes that characterization and maintains that the funds were transferred to the designated Police Recovery Account in compliance with the court order.
This is therefore a question that should be relatively straightforward to resolve through banking records.
Which account received the ₦750.37 million?
Who owned that account?
What instruction authorised the transfer?
What was the exact account identified in the court order?
And most importantly:
Where is the money today?
A forensic reconciliation of the relevant bank records should be capable of answering those questions.
KYC becomes another flashpoint
During the protest, KudiWave also rejected suggestions that it was an unverifiable business or that PalmPay could not have adequately established its identity.
Company Secretary Prince Oko Kalu said PalmPay representatives had visited KudiWave's office and held meetings with the company.
His argument was essentially that a company could not have gone through onboarding with a major fintech without some level of Know Your Customer documentation.
That claim should also be tested against the actual onboarding records.
The relevant question is not simply whether someone visited an office.
It is whether KudiWave's incorporation documents, beneficial ownership information, directors, business address, transaction profile and source-of-funds information were properly obtained and verified.
Allegations of police demands
KudiWave has also alleged that attempts to resolve the account restriction resulted in demands for money.
The company has alleged that an initial demand of ₦50 million was made and that an intermediary subsequently requested ₦5 million, which KudiWave says was paid in dollars.
These allegations have not been established by a court and should be independently investigated rather than treated as established fact.
The allegations are nevertheless serious enough to warrant a clear response because they concern the conduct of law-enforcement officers during an investigation.
If the claims are false, the evidence should establish that.
If they are true, the appropriate disciplinary and criminal processes should follow.
Police promise investigation
At the Force Headquarters, Commissioner of Police Wilson Akpan assured the protesters that their petition would be critically examined.
He told them that the Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, would look into the matter and that whatever was legitimately due to them would be addressed.
The protesters subsequently went to the CBN and submitted another copy of their petition.
That move widens the dispute beyond the police and PalmPay because the case touches on fintech operations, customer funds, payment-system controls and regulatory oversight.
What should happen next?
The cleanest way to resolve the controversy is not through competing public statements.
It is through documents.
Investigators should establish:
- the exact wording of the June 29 court order;
- when and how it was served on PalmPay and KudiWave;
- the precise account identified for the transfer;
- the complete transaction trail for the ₦750.37 million;
- whether the money moved on July 11 and was subsequently returned, as KudiWave alleges;
- who authorised every transfer;
- the source and commercial purpose of the funds;
- the KYC records held by PalmPay;
- the police records supporting the alleged fraud investigation;
- and the legal status of the funds following the July 22 ruling.
There is also a separate legal dimension.
PalmPay has initiated proceedings seeking to restrain KudiWave from making or circulating statements concerning the transfer, while the broader dispute remains before the courts.
That makes documentary evidence even more important.
This is bigger than KudiWave
The ₦750 million dispute raises a question that extends beyond one fintech company.
Nigeria's digital-finance ecosystem depends on customers trusting that their money can be frozen when legally necessary—but also that such restrictions will operate within clear judicial and regulatory boundaries.
Law-enforcement agencies need effective tools to investigate suspected financial crime.
Fintech companies need to comply with KYC and anti-money-laundering requirements.
Banks and payment platforms must comply with lawful court orders.
But customers and businesses also need confidence that frozen funds will be properly documented, traceable and ultimately handled according to the law.
That is why the central issue in the KudiWave dispute should not be decided by placards, social-media arguments or competing accusations.
It should be answered by the court orders, the bank records and an independent reconstruction of the money trail.
Until those records are reconciled, the most important question remains simple:
Who currently has the ₦750.37 million—and under what legal authority is it being held?
Comments
Post a Comment