The immediate past governor of Kogi State, Alhaji Yahaya Bello, facing a 19-count charge of money laundering, breach of trust, and misappropriation of public funds amounting to N80.2 billion, has requested the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to prosecute him in Kogi State rather than Abuja.
In a letter addressed to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, Bello argued through his team of lawyers led by Mr. Abdulwahab Mohammed, SAN, that the Lokoja Division of the high court holds the territorial jurisdiction for the alleged crimes.
“All the funds which the complainant alleged to have been laundered by the defendant are monies of the government of Kogi State whose state capital is in Lokoja,” the letter read.
Bello’s legal team emphasized that the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction is divided into judicial divisions and that criminal proceedings must be initiated and prosecuted in the division where the crime occurred.
Jurisdictional Argument
The letter further stated, “The charges and the proof of evidence indicate criminal breach of trust, criminal misappropriation, and money laundering in respect of the statutory funds of Kogi State.
These alleged predicate offences took place in Kogi State, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, Lokoja Judicial Division.”
The former governor’s legal team urged the court to transfer the case to the Lokoja Division, citing legal precedents and the principles of territorial jurisdiction.
Court Proceedings
During the court proceedings, Mr. Adeola Adedipe, SAN, who announced his appearance for Bello, informed trial Justice Emeka Nwite of the letter written to the Chief Judge.
He noted that the Chief Judge had asked the EFCC’s lawyer to respond to the request for transferring the case file to Kogi.
“We are not in receipt of any decision on this request by the Chief Judge. My duty is first to the court, and I am presenting the facts as they are,” Adedipe stated.
EFCC’s Stance
However, EFCC counsel, Mr. Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, urged the court to cite the two senior lawyers representing Bello for contempt. He argued that the lawyers had repeatedly failed to produce their client in court, breaching the rules of professional conduct.
“Order 31(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for legal practitioners stipulates that any lawyer who fails to comply with an undertaking he made before a court is automatically guilty of misconduct,” Pinheiro argued.
He called for immediate disciplinary action, stating, “If this sort of conduct is not punished, then we will be sliding to a situation worse than Animal Farm.”
Withdrawal of Appearance
Following these arguments, Adedipe applied to withdraw his appearance for Bello, denying he was the lead counsel and claiming the prosecution counsel’s narrative was malicious.
He mentioned that his team had notified the court about their unawareness of Bello’s whereabouts and had enlisted “some elders” to persuade the former governor to appear in court.
In response, EFCC’s counsel insisted it was too late for Adedipe to withdraw, urging the court to set an example by summoning him to the dock.
Adjournment and Next Steps
After hearing from both sides, Justice Nwite adjourned the matter till July 17, ordering the two lawyers representing the defendant to ensure their attendance at the next sitting.
Bello, along with his nephew Ali Bello and two others, Dauda Suleiman and Abdulsalam Hudu, is accused by the EFCC of complicity in money laundering.
Despite previously failing to appear for his arraignment, Bello instructed his lawyers to file an application to set aside an arrest warrant issued against him on April 17 and to challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
The legal battle continues as all parties prepare for the next court date.
