A high court of the federal capital territory (FCT) in Abuja has dismissed an application by Yahaya Bello, former governor of Kogi State, challenging the N110 billion fraud case filed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
In a ruling delivered on Tuesday, Maryann Anenih, presiding judge, held that the court has the jurisdiction to hear the case and rejected Bello’s request to strike out the 16-count charge.
Joseph Daudu, counsel to Bello, had argued that the FCT high court lacked territorial jurisdiction over the matter.
He also contended that the charge amounted to an abuse of court process because a related criminal case involving him is already pending before a federal high court in Abuja.
Responding, Kemi Pinheiro, EFCC counsel, opposed the application, describing it as lacking merit and aimed at delaying the proceedings.
Pinheiro argued that the offences contained in the charge were brought under provisions of the Penal Code, making them properly triable before the FCT high court.
He also submitted that some of the properties allegedly linked to the offences are located in Abuja, giving the court the authority to hear the matter.
On the issue of abuse of court process, the EFCC maintained that the charges before the two courts are distinct.
According to the commission, the case before the FCT high court relates to allegations of conspiracy and criminal breach of trust under the Penal Code, while the federal high court case centres on alleged money laundering offences.
The prosecution further argued that the parties in both cases are not the same, noting that Bello is the sole defendant in the federal high court matter, while the FCT charge involves two additional defendants.
In her ruling, Anenih agreed with the EFCC’s submissions and held that the court was competent to entertain the case. She also ruled that the proceedings do not amount to an abuse of court process.
The judge subsequently dismissed Bello’s application. A similar application filed by the third defendant was also struck out for lacking merit.
Following the ruling, the court directed the prosecution to continue its case and proceed with the testimony of its 16th witness, who was already in court.
