Arrest warrant: Court orders Yahaya Bello to appear

Yahaya Bello

• Says ex-gov must appear even if warrant was illegally obtained

• Adjourns to June 13 for arraignment

Mr. Abdulwahab Mohammed (SAN), counsel to the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, yesterday promised to produce his client before the Federal High Court on June 13 for arraignment in respect of the 19-count charge money laundering charge filed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Bello is accused of laundering about N80.2 billion belonging to the state.

Mohammed gave the promise to produce Bello after Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling, rejected his application for a stay of further proceedings in the case pending the determination of an appeal by the EFCC on a contempt proceeding against the agency’s Chairman in Lokoja.

Mohammed said his client was not afraid to attend court to answer to the charge against him, but was only  scared of being killed because of the information that he got.

“Our client is not afraid to attend court in respect of the charge. But, he fears for his life,” he told the court.

“By the information he has, he is afraid and fears for his life. Will the complainant not arrest him when he comes to court? This is one of the issues,” Mohammed said.

However, Oyedepo, said EFCC is a law abiding organisation and would not take any illegal action against the defendant.

He noted that the agency earlier undertook not to execute the arrest warrant should the defendant voluntarily submit himself for trial.

Turning to the defence lawyer, Oyedepo said: “The EFCC will not kill your client. We have never killed anyone before.”

“But my lord, Adoke collapsed in their custody,” Bello’s lawyer retorted light-heartedly.

Read Also; Don’t leave host community in ruins, Tinubu warns lithium investors

Justice Nwite, in a ruling, held that the former governor ought to show respect to the court by appearing before it before making any application.

According to Justice Nwite, even if the arrest warrant was illegally obtained, the defendant (Bello) should have still shown up in court.

The judge had, on April 23, fixed today (May 10) for the ruling on the ex-governor’s application to set aside the arrest warrant against him.

The judge had on, April 17, issued an arrest warrant to EFCC for Bello’s arrest.

The order was made after the lawyer who appeared for EFCC, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, moved the ex-parte application to the effect.

But Bello’s counsel, Adeola Adedipe, SAN, on April 23, prayed the court to set aside the arrest warrant against their client 

He canvassed that the arrest warrant had become unnecessary since their lead counsel, Abdulwahab Mohammed, SAN, had accepted the service of the charge on behalf of the ex-governor.

He argued that the arrest warrant order, having been made before the charge ought to be set aside suo motu (on its own accord, without any request by the parties involved).

The senior lawyer argued that contrary to Pinheiro’s submission that the ex-governor must be in court first before any application could be entertained being a criminal case, he said the anti-graft agency also made an application on April 18 after the warrant arrest was issued to EFCC on April 17 and that the court granted it.

The lawyer submitted that the arrest warrant was issued in favour of the EFCC by the court in violation of fair hearing to their client.

According to him, the complainant made an application for substituted service on 18th day of April after the arrest warrant had been issued on 17th day of April and today, my noble lord granted it.

“The court must satisfy itself that the defendant (Bello) will not be prejudiced in fairness if the warrant of arrest continues to hang on his neck, having been made before service of the charge contrary to Section 394 of ACJA,” Adeola argued.

He argued that justice should be a three-way traffic; that is, justice to the prosecution, the defendant and the public.

He said for Bello to appear in court, he must have the notion that he would get justice.

Adedipe also argued that the EFCC was an unconstitutional body because its establishment was not ratified by the 36 states of the federation.

He said that for the EFCC to become a constitutional body, the 36 states of the federation must ratify the law establishing it as against the current position, that the EFCC Establishment Act was unilaterally ratified by the Federal Government.

He therefore asked the judge to vacate the arrest warrant against the former governor.

But Pinheiro vehemently opposed the application.

The appropriateness of the siege on Bello’s residence by operatives of the Commission about two weeks ago had elicited a  heated debate across the country, particularly with the realisation that there had been a restraining order against such action, which had not been vacated as of the time of such action.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

* indicates required

Intuit Mailchimp