COURT FIXES DATES FOR RESPONSE TO SUMMONS IN ALLEGED FRAUD SUIT AGAINST YAHAYA BELLO

Read Time:2 Minute, 6 Second

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has requested that the hearing in its new allegation against Kogi State’s immediate past Governor, Yahaya Bello, and two others be postponed until November 14, 2024.

At the resumed hearing, Rotimi Oyedepo, Counsel to the Commission, stated that the court issued a public summons against Bello, mandating that it be published and the charge be pasted.

The trial judge, Justice Maryann Anenih, however, intervened, noting that she had not requested that the charge be pasted, only the summons.

Oyedepo stated that he expected Bello to appear in court on November 14, citing the 30-day period of the summons, and so requested an adjournment until November 14 for the arraignment of the three defendants.

Joseph Daudu, a senior counsel in Nigeria who represented the second defendant, objected to this.

He added that the matter was for arraignment and that they were prepared, emphasising that the accused were all independent and should be treated accordingly.

“You cannot be using somebody as a human shield when they are not in hostage. I don’t like this practice,” he said.

Counsel to the 3rd defendant, aligned with Daudu, he stated in the alternative that the court take his client’s application for bail.

The EFCC Counsel, Oyedepo, however, stated that the motion for bail could not be considered because the indictment was a joint charge.

He believes it contains conspiracy charges.

Insisting that the court adjourn till November 14, the EFCC counsel informed the court that there was an application for the enforcement of the second defendant’s fundamental rights and that the oral application could not be taken.

The second defendant’s counsel, Daudu, contended that this violated the requirements of a fair hearing.

“His argument is persuasive but does not go by what the law says. That until one individual appears before they can be arraigned. I don’t understand this kind of practice.

“It is an affront to fair hearing because the privilege of fair hearing allows us to raise any issue. Keeping them for 10 years will have no impact.

“They have enjoyed administrative bail before with the EFCC, so it won’t hurt their pride if they give them,” he stated.

The second defendant’s counsel requested a date for his client’s fundamental rights application.

Though the trial judge denied the defendants’ oral bail application, she instructed them to submit written applications.

Justice MaryAnne Anenih adjourned the case to the 14th and 20th of November for the first defendant’s response to summons and/or arraignment.