Connect with us

News

Yahaya Bello Vs EFCC: Court Adjourns Ruling and Continuation of Trials to June 26 , 27 and July 4 and 5

Published

on

447 Views

You cannot cross examine him based on the document,” Daudu SAN argued. Enitan SAN added that he had the right to draw the attention of the court to some specific paragraphs in the document.

The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned the hearing of the alleged money laundering case instituted against the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to June 26, 27 and July 4 and 5 for ruling on the request by the prosecution to “cross-examine” the 3rd witness and for continuation of trial.

Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the hearing after listening to addresses by the prosecution and defence counsels on the Prosecution’s move to initially cross-examine the witness, a position that was rejected by the Defendant’s Counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN.

When the matter was called for continuation of cross-examination, the Defendant’s counsel asked the witness, Nicholas Ojehomon, whether he had testified in other courts with respect to the issue of school fees paid by the Bello family to AISA, he said yes.

But the witness, an internal auditor at the American International School, Abuja, said he could not mention the exact courts.

He admitted testifying in a similar charge involving Ali Bello but added that he never said anything adversely against former Governor Yahaya Bello just as he had not said anything negative or adversely against him in the instant charge.

After Daudu SAN concluded the cross-examination of the witness, Nicholas Ojehomon, the EFCC’s lawyer, Olukayode Enitan, SAN, moved to also cross-examine the Commission’s witness on Exhibit 19.

He told the court that he was not re-examining the EFCC’s witness, but cross-examining him because the document was admitted in evidence.

“I am not re-examining him, I am cross-examining him because they brought this document,” he said.

The Defendant’s lawyer, however, drew the court’s attention to the fact that the prosecution counsel’s position was unknown to law, in line with the Evidence Act.

“If you want to cross-examine your own witness, you have to first declare him a hostile witness. You cannot cross examine him based on the document,” Daudu SAN argued. Enitan SAN added that he had the right to draw the attention of the court to some specific paragraphs in the document.

At this point, the judge asked: “Do you have any provision of the law to support this?””I will draw your lordship attention to Section 36 of the Constitution.

They sought to tender this document, we objected and the court granted their prayer. Fair hearing demands that the complainant too has the right to examine this because Section 36 of the Constitution talks of fair hearing,”

Enitan responded. “We are not saying that they cannot re-examine the witness. That is what Section 36 under the law says about fair hearing. But if it is to cross-examine him, he will have to show us the law that backs that.

“He cannot come under the guise of fair hearing to want to cross-examine the witness,” the Defendant’s lawyer maintained. The judge, at the end of the arguments, refused to allow cross-examination of the witness by the EFCC lawyer.”

Under the procedure, the witness gives evidence in chief and the defendant cross examines, then the prosecution re-examines.

“With due respect, what I will do is if you people are so skewed to continue with this, it is better to address me on this and I will take a position,” he stated.

At this point, the prosecution counsel agreed to re-examine the EFCC’s witness and the judge gave him the go-ahead.”You can re-examine him on that but not to ask questions that will show cross examination,” Justice Nwite said.

However, when the prosecution lawyer proceeded to re-examine the witness, and his questions pointed at cross-examination, as observed by Daudu SAN, the judge insisted that the parties had to address him on the specific issue.

The Defendant’s Counsel, in his address, maintained that the position was unknown to law.

“My lord, the procedure that is being sought by the prosecution by refering the witness to the document tender in Exhibit 19 and by asking him to read paragraph 1, without drawing his attention to the issue on how the document affected his evidence in chief, the question asked in cross-examination, and the ambiguity, which needs clarification, amounts to a strange and unknown procedure not covered by the Evidence Act,” he stated.

Enitan SAN, disagreed, saying that in the case of Amobi Amobi referred to by the defendant’s counsel, the Supreme Court held that the learned trial judge ought to have allowed a re-examination of Exhibit E.

He said when the defendant sought to introduce the document, the prosecution team “submitted that this document was not made by the witness and as such, he should not be allowed to speak to it under cross examination or allowed to be confronted with it.”

“Having brought it in now, during the case of the prosecution, particularly during the cross examination of PW-3, your lordship should not allow them to shut us out as that would amount to the court allowing them to blow hot and cold,” Pinheiro SAN said.

Justice Nwite thereafter adjourned to June 26, 27 and July 4 and 5 for ruling and continuation of trial.

The 3rd prosecution witness had, at the last hearing on Thursday, said there was no wired transfer of fees from the Kogi State Government or any of the local Governments in the state to the account of the American International School, Abuja.

He also read out a part of a previous Federal Capital Territory High Court judgment that said there was no court order for AISA to return fees to EFCC or any judgment declaring the money as proceeds of money laundering.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

News

Dr. Esege Nwandu Challenges Euracare Hospital’s Statement over Nephew’s Death

Published

on

8 Views

The controversy surrounding the tragic death of 21-month-old Nkanu Nnamdi Esege, son of acclaimed Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and her husband Dr. Ivara Esege, has intensified with a pointed rebuttal from the child’s aunt, Dr. Anthea Esege Nwandu.

Dr. Nwandu, a dual board-certified Internal Medicine physician with over 30 years of clinical experience in Nigeria and the United States—including board certifications from the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Lifestyle Medicine, fellowship in the American College of Physicians, and a Master of Public Health from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health—has publicly challenged the January 10, 2026, statement issued by Euracare Multispecialist Hospital in Lagos, where the toddler died on January 7 following a brief illness.

The child had been receiving treatment at Atlantis Hospital for what began as a suspected cold but developed into a serious infection. He was described as medically stable and scheduled for evacuation to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore for further care when referred to Euracare for an MRI scan and central line insertion on January 6.

In her detailed rebuttal, Dr. Nwandu directly addressed what she described as significant falsehoods in Euracare’s statement, which expressed condolences while asserting that circulated reports contained inaccuracies, that the child arrived critically ill after treatment at two pediatric centers, and that care adhered to international standards.

Dr. Nwandu countered key claims as follows:

  • Euracare’s assertion that the child had received care at two pediatric centers was false; he had been at only one hospital (Atlantis) prior to Euracare.
  • On adherence to international standards: She alleged multiple breaches, including failure to provide continuous oxygen therapy during sedation (a requirement for children on oxygen), lack of continuous monitoring of blood oxygen levels, pulse, and respiration, and no resuscitative equipment (such as an Ambu bag) during transfers within the hospital.
  • She questioned the accuracy of any documentation regarding the timing or duration of respiratory or cardiac arrest due to absent monitoring.
  • Specific practices were criticized as non-standard, including an anesthesiologist carrying the post-sedation child on his shoulder without visual oversight or monitoring, insisting on being alone in the elevator with the child, and disconnecting oxygen during transfer to the ICU.

Dr. Nwandu emphasized that these alleged lapses occurred despite the child’s stability and planned international transfer, describing them as deviations from protocols that could have contributed to the fatal outcome.

Euracare’s January 10 statement expressed “deepest sympathies” for the “profound and unimaginable loss,” denied negligence, noted an ongoing internal investigation, and highlighted collaborative care with external teams. The hospital has described the child as critically ill upon arrival and maintained that all actions followed established protocols.

The case has drawn widespread attention, with Lagos State authorities launching an independent investigation into the circumstances, amid broader scrutiny of medical standards in Nigeria. The Nigerian Society of Anaesthetists is also monitoring developments.

The family, including Adichie, has expressed devastation and called for accountability to prevent future tragedies. Nkanu was one of twin boys born to the couple via surrogacy in 2024. Public figures, including Nigerian President Bola Tinubu, have offered condolences as the matter continues to unfold.

Continue Reading

Crime

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie blames Euracare Hospital for son’s death

Published

on

25 Views

Chimamanda Ngozi AAdichie has revealed how her son was killed at Euracare Hospital by an anesthesiologist, in her statement, she said: “My son would be alive today if not for an incident at Euracare Hospital on January 6th.We were in Lagos for Christmas.

Nkanu had what we first thought was just a cold, but soon turned into a very serious infection and he was admitted to Atlantis hospital. He was to travel to the US the next day, January 7th, accompanied by Travelling Doctors. A team at Johns Hopkins was waiting to receive him in Baltimore.

The Hopkins team had asked for a lumbar puncture test and an MRI. The Nigerian team had also decided to put in a ‘central line’ (used to administer iv medications) in preparation for Nkanu’s flight. Atlantis hospital referred us to Euracare Hospital, which was said to be the best place to have the procedures done.

The morning of the 6th, we left Atlantis hospital for Euracare, Nkanu carried in his father’s arms. We were told he would need to be sedated to prevent him from moving during the MRI and the ‘central line’ procedure.

I was waiting just outside the theater. I saw people, including Dr M, rushing into the theater and immediately knew something had happened.

A short time later, Dr M came out and told me Nkanu had been given too much propofol by the anesthesiologist, had become unresponsive and was quickly resuscitated.

But suddenly Nkanu was on a ventilator, he was intubated and placed in the ICU. The next thing I heard was that he had seizures. Cardiac arrest. All these had never happened before. Some hours later, Nkanu was goneIt turns out that Nkanu was NEVER monitored after being given too much propofol.

The anesthesiologist had just casually carried Nkanu on his shoulder to the theater, so nobody knows when exactly Nkanu became unresponsive. How can you sedate a sick child and neglect to

monitor him? Later, after the ‘central line’ procedure, the anesthesiologist casually switched off Nkanu’s oxygen and again decided to carry him on his shoulder to the ICU!

The anesthesiologist was CRIMINALLY negligent. He was fatally casual and careless with the precious life of a child. No proper protocol was followed. We brought in a child who was unwell but stable and scheduled to travel the next day. We came to conduct basic procedures.

And suddenly, our beautiful little boy was gone forever. It is like living your worst nightmare. I will never survive the loss of my child.

We have now heard about two previous cases of this same anesthesiologist overdosing children. Why did Euracare allow him to keep working? This must never happen to another child.

Continue Reading

News

LASG Announces Traffic Diversion Tonight At Fadeyi, Ojuelegba Bridge

Consequently, motorists are advised to use the highlighted route during the nighttime installation of the barriers; Motorists from Fadeyi Donmanlong Bridge/Ayilara inbound Ojuelegba are to make use of the Service Lane from Fadeyi/Jibowu/Empire/Donmanlong to link Barracks to access their desired destinations.

Published

on

By

36 Views

The Lagos State Government has announced that installations of truck barriers at Fadeyi inward Donmanlong and Donmanlong inward Ojuelegba will takes effect from Saturday, January 10, 2026, at 10pm until Sunday, January 11, 2026

Therefore, the Commissioner for Transportation, Mr. Oluwaseun Osiyemi, urges motorists to use alternative routes during the installations period.

He said that the temporary closure of the bridge is to enhance road safety and prevent accidents along these high-traffic routes.

Consequently, Motorists are advised to use the highlighted route during the nighttime installation of the barriers; Motorists from Fadeyi Donmanlong Bridge/Ayilara inbound Ojuelegba are to make use of the Service Lane from Fadeyi/Jibowu/Empire/Donmanlong to link Barracks to access their desired destinations,” he said.

He implored residents and motorists to remain patient, noting that the installation was scheduled for night hours to minimize disruptions.

The Commissioner warned that motorists who vandalize or damage the barriers will face the wrath of the law.

Continue Reading

Trending