Yahaya Bello: Court Sets Dec 10 On Bail Application

Justice Maryann Anenih of the Federal Capital Territory High Court has fixed December 10 for ruling on the bail applications by the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, and two others.

The Judge fixed the date after taking arguments for and against the bail request by Bello’s lawyer, Joseph Bodunde Dauda, and the Prosecution’s Counsel, Kemi Pinheiro.

Ex-Gov Bello and two others had, on Wednesday, pleaded not guilty to the 16-count charges brought against them by the EFCC, and Bello, who is the 1st defendant, vehemently denied the allegations before Justice Maryann Anenih as they were reeled out by the Court Registrar.

After taking their plea, the Defendant’s Counsel, JB Daudu, moved an application for bail, but the EFCC Counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, opposed the application, saying it had expired in October.

Making clarifications, the Defendant’s Counsel said the only relevant application before the Court was the motion for bail in respect of the first defendant, which was filed on November 22.

The EFCC had moved for trial to commence immediately and was ready to call its first witness but, Bello’s Counsel argued that they were served with the charge at 11 pm on November 26 and needed time to prepare his client.

On the bail application, Daudu said the law in the country says a defendant is innocent until proven guilty, having the rights to enjoy his liberty while preparing for trial as the court should not use issues from another court to determine issues before the FCT High
Court

Pointing out some paragraphs in the counter affidavit, he said the prosecution raised issues that had to do with a matter at the Federal High Court, when the jurisdiction of the Court is challenged, the defendant need not to appear until the issues arising from the jurisdiction are resolved,” he noted.

The prosecution counsel also opposed the bail application for the 2nd Defendant, saying since he was still a government official with the Director-General, Kogi State Government House, there was the likelihood of him committing the same offence.

But the Defendant’s Counsel argued that the use of “may” in the prosecution’s counter affidavit did not show where the 2nd defendant allegedly committed another offence after being granted bail.

He insisted that the counter affidavit lacked merit as it did not show that the defendant was a habitual offender and therefore, urged the court to grant the application for bail.

Justice Anenih adjourned ruling on the bail application to December 10 and directed that the three defendants should remain in EFCC custody.

Garry Ochigbo, Edited By Grace Namiji