Court Adjourns to November 14 for Bello’s Response to Summons Following EFCC’s Request

Alex Enumah in Abuja

Justice Maryanne Anenih of a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court on Thursday adjourned proceedings till November 14, for former Governor of Kogi State, Mr Yahaya Bello, to appear before her in respect of court summons.

The adjournment was sequel to a formal request by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Recall that the court had on October 3, summoned Bello to appear before her court on October 24, in respect of a fresh 16-count charge pending against him.

The order was following an application filed by the EFCC, seeking the arraignment of the former governor and two others, over alleged fraud to the tune of N110 billion.

The two others in the suit marked: CR/7781/2024, are Bello Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu.

When the matter came up on Thursday, EFCC’s lawyer, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, informed the court that its orders directing the publication of the public summons and pasting of the charge against the 1st defendant has been complied with.

However, the judge quickly interjected, stating that she did not ask that the charge be pasted, only the summons.

Continuing, Oyedepo said he expected the 1st defendant to be in court on November 14, making reference to the 30-day duration of the summons, and therefore sought for adjournment till November 14 for arraignment of the three defendants.

But, lawyers to the 2nd defendant, Chief Joseph Daudu, SAN, who appeared for the 2nd defendant, objected to this.

He said the matter was for arraignment, and that they were ready, noting that the defendants were all independent and should be so treated.

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

Associating with the submissions of Daudu, lead counsel to the 3rd defendant, Mr A. M. Aliyu, SAN, he urged that, in the alternative, he would be asking the court to take his client’s application for bail.

Objecting, Oyedepo argued that the application for bail could not be taken as the charge was a joint charge, adding that there are counts of conspiracy in it.

Insisting that the court should adjourn to November 14, the EFCC lawyer notified the court that there was an application for the enforcement of fundamental rights of the 2nd defendant and that the oral application cannot be taken.

Daudu, however insisted that this negated the principles of 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,” the senior lawyer stated.

Similarly, Aliyu asked for a date for fundamental rights application for his client.

Though the judge refused the oral application for bail, she said the defendants should come formally by filling applications in writing.

She therefore adjourned to 14th and 20th November for response of the 1st defendant to summons and/or arraignment.