Court fixes November 14 for Yahaya Bello’s arraignment
The arraignment of the defendants and response to the summons issued by the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Maitama, Abuja for the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, has been adjourned till November 14.
Justice Maryann Anenih passed the ruling on Thursday.
Bello will appear before the Court for arraignment on the fresh 16-count charges levelled against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), had requested the adjournment, citing that the court had issued a public summons against the 1st defendant (Bello) at the last adjourned date.
The Prosecution Counsel told the court that the 1st defendant is expected to be in court on November 14, pointing to the 30-day duration of the summons in seeking adjournment till November 14 for the arraignment of all three defendants.
The 2nd defendant’s Counsel, JB Daudu (SAN), objected to this, noting that the case was scheduled for arraignment, stressing that, if the prosecution is not ready to read the charge to the defendants, he will have to ask that they be discharged as the defendant has been in custody for over one month.
Dauda pointed out that the defendants are all independent entities and as such, the absence of one should not affect the others.
“My Lord, we are here for arraignment. I don’t think the prosecution should use them as a shield as they are individually here on their own.
“I will ask for their discharge if he (the prosecution) is not ready for arraignment. We either take the plea or their discharge.
“You cannot be using somebody as a human shield when they are not in hostage. I don’t like this practice,” he said.
The counsel to the 3rd defendant, A.M. Aliyu (SAN), agreed with the submission of the 2nd defendant’s counsel, adding that he would be asking the court to take his client’s application for bail.
“In the alternative, my Lord, I have filed an application for bail which was duly served on the complainant,” Dauda said.
In his counterargument, the prosecution counsel noted that the bail application could not be taken as the charge was a joint charge, with counts of conspiracy contained within.
Oyedepo argued that the defence counsel has served the anti-graft agency with an application for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of the 2nd defendant and that the oral application cannot be taken.
This, Dauda argued, is against the principles of fair hearing.
“Fundamental human right is not about freedom alone but fair hearing. I urge my Lord to take a global look at the matter. They left their family for over a month now.
“We urge the court to release the two on bail and that keeping them will not have any impact on the case.
“His argument is persuasive but does not go by what the law says. That is 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 it to them,” Dauda argued.
Dauda also asked the court for a date for a fundamental rights application for his client.
Justice Anenih, after hearing the submissions of both parties, rejected the oral application for bail by the defendants.
The defendants were, instead, asked to approach the court with a formal application.
“I have considered your application for bail; it is noted that, as rightly stated by the prosecution, the defendants are at liberty to make proper application for bail in this court; otherwise, the oral application made today is hereby refused,” Justice Anenih held.
The court was then adjourned to November 14 and 20 for the response of the 1st defendant to summons and/or arraignment.
