Connect with us

Headline

Yahaya Bello vs EFCC: The Tussle Continues

Published

on

By Eric Elezuo

With the declaration of the Apppeal Court, sitting in Abuja over the weekend, ordering a stay of proceedings in the contempt charge instituted by Yahaya Bello, former Kogi governor, against Ola Olukoyede, chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the stage seems set for an elongation of legal fireworks between the two feuding entities.

The declaration was a follow-up of Bello, who approached the Kogi High Court, seeking an order to issue and serve the respondent (EFCC chairman) with “form 49 notice” to show cause why an order of committal should not be made on him.

The judge, after listening to the arguments of the applicant’s counsel, the submission and the exhibits attached in the written address, granted Bello’s prayers and ordered Olukoyede to be summoned to appear before the court to answer the contempt charge.

However, while it is believed that the crisis of apprehending the former governor for prosecution is an institutional matter, many on the other hand, has accused the EFCC chairman of attaching a lot of personal interest in the matter going by the way he is fighting tooth and nail to see Bello in custody.

In a chat with editors at the EFCC Headquarters, Jabi, Abuja, the anti-graft agency chairman swore to follow the prosecution of Bello to the logical conclusion.

He also vowed that all those who obstructed the arrest of the former governor would be brought to justice.

The EFCC is seeking to arraign Bello on 19 counts bordering on alleged money laundering, breach of trust and misappropriation of funds to the tune of N80.2 billion.

“If I do not personally oversee the completion of the investigation regarding Yahaya Bello, I will tender my resignation as the EFCC Chairman,” Mr Olukoyede had vowed, adding that those who obstructed the arrest of the former governor would be brought to book. This was a veiled accusation against the governor of Kogi State, Usman Ododo, who used security agents to forestall the arrest of Bello in Abuja.

Olukoyede had also accused Bello of paying his children’s school fees upfront with funds from the atatae coffers.

“A sitting governor moved $720,000 directly from the government account to the Bureau de Change and used it to pay for the school fees of his child in advance in a poor state like Kogi, and you want me close my eyes under the guise that I’m being used. Use by who? At this stage of my life? By who for crying out loud?

“I didn’t initiate the case, I inherited the case file,” he retorted.

The EFCC had sought to arrest Yahaya Bello following his absence from court, and an order by Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja after his absence in court.

He was absent from court for his arraignment on a 19-count charge of alleged money laundering to the tune of ₦80bn.

The judge relied on sections 384(4) and (5) of the Administrative and Criminal Justice Act 2015, directing the counsel to the immediate past governor to receive a copy of the charge.

The court held that where it had become impossible to effect personal service of a legal process on a defendant, such could be done through substituted means.

Justice Nwite further held that it was clear that the former governor failed to appear in court for his arraignment.

Notable minds including veteran journalist, Dele Momodu; human advocate and constitutional lawyer, Mike Ozekhome among others have said that the brazen nature with which Olukoyede is going about the matter smacks of personal vendetta, noting that now that the court of appeal has ordered a stay of execution of the contempt of court charges against Olukoyede, everyone must maintain status quotes, and allow Bello to respond to court summon, as the case is now between him and the court of Justice Nwite.

On his part, Momodu has lashed out at the EFCC for selective prosecution, wondering if Olukoyede has any personal stake in the matter, adding that generally the EFCC misfired in the Bello saga.

He said in part, during his Instagram live show:

“I don’t work for EFCC but from all the things that I have read, a lot of them, they misfired. That is the honest truth. They misfired. They didn’t do their due diligence. When you said a man took out money and paid for his children’s school fees, just as he was about to leave power, and you go and check the documents and you see that these things started happening from 2021, 2022 (laughs); I am not an illiterate.

“How do you expect me to believe everything they said when they were too much in a hurry to prosecute him that they did not take their time to check the file. Once you allow a lacuna in law, everything will fall flat.

“That is it. I am not one of those people who will say because I don’t like APC and because I supported Dino Melaye in the last election in Kogi State. Dino is my guy. But, I will not because of that be blinded by hatred for Yahaya Bello and say yes, he should go and surrender himself to EFCC when there is an existing injunction.

“And he is not the only governor who went to court and if the court has granted him that, so be it. We all know that our judiciary is not so perfect but you know, even at that, law is law, it must be obeyed. If we disobey the rule of law, then, we will have to obey the rule of the jungle. So, I never said that they are lying, it is their own statement that shows that they didn’t do their due diligence.”

TheCable, in its report, recalled that “a Kogi State high court presided over by Isa Jamil Abdullahi, had ordered Olukoyede to appear before it on May 13 to show why he should not be committed to prison for allegedly disobeying its order restraining the EFCC from arresting or taking any action against Bello.

“However, the EFCC chairman filed an appeal against the court summon.

“Olukoyede filed two motions, one seeking a stay of execution of the summon, and another one asking to serve processes on Bello via substituted means by pasting the process at his Abuja residence on No 9 Bengazi Steet Wuse Zone 4.

“In its ruling, a three-member panel of justices led by Joseph Oyewole granted the two motions.

“The appellate court fixed May 20 for the hearing of the substantive appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/413/2024.

“Bello had on February 8, 2024, instituted a fundamental rights enforcement suit, asking the court to declare that “the incessant harassment, threats of arrest and detention, negative press releases, malicious prosecution” by the EFCC, “without any formal invitation, is politically motivated and interference with his right to liberty, freedom of movement, and fair hearing”.

“The former governor also sought an order “restraining the respondent by themselves, their agents, servants or privies from continuing to harass, threaten to arrest or detain him”.

“On February 9, the Kogi high court granted an interim injunction restraining the EFCC from “continuing to harass, threaten to arrest, detain, prosecute Bello, his former appointees, and his staff or family members, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive originating motion for the enforcement of his fundamental rights”.

On March 12, the EFCC filed an appeal against the interim injunction because the court could not stop the commission from carrying out its statutory responsibility.

The Kogi high court delivered judgment on the substantive motion on notice on April 17 wherein the presiding judge granted an order restraining the EFCC “from continuing to harass, threaten to arrest or detain Bello”.

However, the judge directed the commission to file a charge against Bello before an appropriate court if it had reasons to do so.

The judgment coincided with the recent “siege” laid on the Abuja residence of  Bello by EFCC operatives seeking to arrest him.

The commission had also obtained a warrant of arrest against the former governor from the federal high court in Abuja.

The EFCC is seeking to arraign Bello on 19 counts bordering on alleged money laundering, breach of trust and misappropriation of funds to the tune of N80.2 billion.

At the scheduled arraignment on April 18, Bello was absent.

At the court session, Abdulwahab Mohammed, counsel to Bello, told  Emeka Nwite, the presiding judge, that the court lacked jurisdiction to grant the warrant of arrest in the first instance.

He referenced the February 9 interim injunction issued by the Kogi high court, adding that the appeal filed by the EFCC was still pending.

However, the EFCC has filed a notice to withdraw the appeal.

In the notice filed on April 22, the anti-graft agency said the withdrawal was predicated on the fact that events have overtaken the appeal.

The commission also admitted that the appeal was filed out of the time allowed by law.

With the present status, legal minds are of the opinion that matters have returned to status quo, and Justice Emeka Nwite, reserved the right to order Bello’s appearance in court, and await his appearance before any other injunction can be  made.

“For now, it is not about who won or who did not. The matters of the case rest with the invitation of Bello by Justice Nwite. Bello was absent during his first summon, and the case was adjourned. So, everyone has to keep the calm and wait for the next hearing and see if he appears or not as directly by his lordship,” Ozekhome noted.

As it is therefore, May 20 will be a deciding factor for both Bello and EFCC as the tussle for who laughs last continues.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headline

Supreme Court Reserves Judgment in Appeal over Nullified PDP Convention

Published

on

By

The Supreme Court has reserved its judgment in the appeal filed by the Taminu Turaki-led group of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) seeking to overturn the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which nullified the conduct of the party’s national convention, held last year in Ibadan, Oyo State.

A five-member panel of the apex court announced on Wednesday that its judgment would be delivered on a date to be communicated to all parties in the appeal.

Justice Garba Mohammed, who led the five-member panel, made the announcement shortly after lawyers representing parties in the appeal adopted their processes as briefs of their arguments for and against the appeal.

The appeal was filed by the Turaki-led group’s national executives of the party who emerged from the convention.

They had approached the apex court to challenge the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which had nullified the convention for being held in disobedience of a valid order of the court.

While adopting their brief of argument filed on April 2, the appellants, through their team of lawyers led by Paul Erokoro (SAN), urged the Supreme Court not only to allow their appeal but also to dismiss a cross-appeal lodged against them by a leadership group in the party aligned with the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike.

Meanwhile, Lamido, who was represented by J. C. Njikonye (SAN), as well as the Wike-backed group represented by Joseph Daudu (SAN), filed preliminary objections seeking dismissal of the appeal.

The respondents insisted that, contrary to the contention by the Turaki-led group, the appeal did not fall within the sphere of the PDP’s internal affairs.

It was the respondents’ position that both the high court and the appellate court had rightly exercised jurisdiction over the matter.

Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, in a judgment last year, restrained the then-Ambassador Iliya Damagum-led National Executive Committee of the PDP from proceeding with the convention slated for November 15 and 16, 2026, in Ibadan, Oyo State.

Justice Lifu had ordered that the convention should not hold until an aspirant to the office of national chairman, former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido, is allowed to purchase interest and nomination forms to enable him to participate in the convention for the election of national officers.

The party, however, went ahead to conduct the convention in disregard of the orders of the court.

The PDP had predicated its action to conduct the convention on the grounds that the court lacked the jurisdiction to stop the convention, as the issue brought before it was an internal matter of the PDP, which no court has jurisdiction to delve into.

However, the appellate court in its judgment last month disagreed that the issue at the trial court was an internal affair of a political party, which courts cannot entertain.

The three-member panel of the appellate court subsequently nullified the outcome of the convention for being held in disobedience to the orders of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Dissatisfied, the PDP approached the apex court, praying it to accept the appeal against the lower court judgment, set the judgment aside, and hold that the issue was an internal matter of the PDP, which both the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain.

However, the respondents in the appeal urged the court to dismiss the appeal for lack of merit and hold otherwise.

Continue Reading

Headline

LP: Nenadi Usman Floors Julius Abure at Appeal Court

Published

on

By

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has dismissed the appeal filed by Julius Abure challenging the legitimacy of the Nenadi Usman-led leadership of the Labour Party (LP).

A three-member panel of the appellate court, in a Tuesday judgment, unanimously affirmed the January 21 judgment by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which upheld the legitimacy of the 29-member caretaker committee of the LP, led by Senator Usman.

In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Oyejoju Oyewumi, which Justices Abba Mohammed and Eberechi Nyesom-Wike agreed with, the appellate court held that the earlier Supreme Court judgment conclusively settled the leadership dispute within the LP by nullifying the convention that purportedly returned Abure as National Chairman.

Justice Lifu had, in the January 21 judgment, relied on an April 4, 2025, decision of the Supreme Court, which held that Abure’s tenure as the party’s National Chairman had expired. The judgment directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognize Senator Usman and other members of her committee as the legitimate leaders of the party, to the exclusion of all others.

The court further held that the lower court had the power under Section 251 of the Constitution to compel a statutory Federal government agency to perform its functions when it ordered INEC to recognize Senator Nenadi Usman as the National Chairman of the Labour Party.

It was equally agreed with the trial court that constituting the LP’s caretaker committee, headed by Usman, was a doctrine of necessity required to provide leadership in the party when a vacuum appeared to exist.

The court faulted Abure’s claim that the trial court denied him a fair hearing and accused him of abusing the court process.

The court also accused Abure of forum shopping by appearing before the Nasarawa State High Court in a case already decided by the Supreme Court, and of persisting in the claim the party’s leadership despite the apex court’s clear and unambiguous pronouncement.

It held that the appeal, marked: CA/ABJ/CV/255/2026, was devoid of merit and constituted an abuse of court process.

“On the whole, I agree with the decision and conclusion of the trial court as the same, being in accordance with the Constitution,” Justice Oyewumi held, adding that the lower court reached a reasonable conclusion that the Court of Appeal cannot fault.

While dismissing the appeal, the court awarded him costs of N10 million for wasting the court’s time on an issue that had already been conclusively determined.

Earlier, the court held that Nenadi Usman, as a juristic person, had the right to file the case before the trial court, and that the trial court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the case.

The court also rejected Abure’s allegation that the lower court denied him a fair hearing, noting that the claim lacked any basis.

Continue Reading

Headline

Tinubu Sacks Edun, Appoints Oyedele As Finance Minister

Published

on

By

President Bola Tinubu has approved a minor cabinet reshuffle in the membership of the Federal Executive Council (FEC).

According to a memo signed by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator George Akume, two cabinet members, Mr. Wale Edun and Arc. Ahmed Musa Dangiwa are to leave the cabinet while their replacements have been named.

A statement signed by the Special Adviser, Media and Publicity to the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Yomi Odunuga, on Tuesday evening, said Edun, until the latest development, was the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy.

“He has been directed to hand over to Mr. Taiwo Oyedele, who is now to take over as Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy. Oyedele was formerly a Minister of State in the ministry.

“Also Mr. Muttaqha Rabe Darma (PhD.) has been named as the ministerial nominee and minister-designate for the Housing and Urban Development Ministry,” Odunuga stated.

The memo also directed Dangiwa to hand over to the Minister of State in the ministry pending Darma’s confirmation.

The memo stated that “all handing over and taking over processes should be completed on or before close of business on Thursday 23rd April, 2026.”

Explaining the President’s decision, Odunuga quoted Akume as saying: “These changes are aimed at strengthening cohesion, synergy in governance as well as achieving more impactful delivery on the economy to Nigerians, through the Renewed Hope Agenda.”

He said the President, in approving the cabinet reshuffle, has fully exercised his powers as conferred on him by Sections 147 and 148 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999, as amended).

The President thanked the outgoing ministers for their services to the nation while wishing them the best in all their future endeavours.

The President, Akume noted, equally assured all cabinet members that “the process of reinvigoration shall be continuous.”

Continue Reading

Trending