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

734 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

JUST IN: Court Grants Nasir El-Rufai N100m Bail Over Alleged National Security Breach

Published

on

21 Views

The Federal High Court in Abuja has granted bail to former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, in the sum of N100 million with one surety in like sum.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik handed down the ruling on Monday in the case filed by the Department of State Services (DSS), which is prosecuting El-Rufai for alleged breach of national security.

The former governor had publicly admitted on national television to wiretapping the office of the National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu.

While granting the bail application, Justice Abdulmalik imposed stringent conditions for its perfection. The proposed surety must:

  • Reside in either Maitama or Asokoro, Abuja, and deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy of a landed property with the court registry.
  • Be a federal civil servant on Grade Level 17 or above.
  • Submit proof of salary payments for the past three months, supported by an authentication letter from the branch bank manager within the court’s jurisdiction.
  • Swear to an affidavit of means, sign a bail bond, and provide a recent passport photograph.

Additionally, El-Rufai must surrender all his valid passports to the court. The surety is also required to provide a verification letter from his immediate department and a tax clearance certificate for the last six months.

The court further directed El-Rufai to submit a letter of attestation from the Chairman of the Kaduna State Traditional Council.

As part of the bail conditions, the former governor must report to the DSS headquarters on the last Friday of every month by 10 a.m. to sign the attendance register until the determination of the case.

Justice Abdulmalik warned that any violation of these conditions would result in the immediate revocation of the bail. The court also ordered an accelerated hearing of the matter.

Continue Reading

News

Abu-Bilal al-Minuki: Deadly But Harmless Looking – Poison Dart Frog

Positions that used to be dominated by Syrian and Iraqis in the top echelons of the Islamic State leadership are now filled by African veteran jihadists from all over the continent.

Published

on

By

39 Views
  

Abu Bilal al-Mainuki was elevated to the position of head of the Islamic State General Directorate of Provinces, replacing Abdul Qadir Mumin (Somali national) only three months ago in February 2026.

This placed him as the second in charge of the Islamic State global organization right after the Caliph Abu Hafs al-Hashimi.

Positions that used to be dominated by Syrian and Iraqis in the top echelons of the Islamic State leadership are now filled by African veteran jihadists from all over the continent.

Before February 2026, Abu Bilal al-Mainuki was head of the al-Furqan regional office which oversees the Sahelian, Libyan and West African Provinces.

Before that he was second-in-command to Abu Musab al-Barnawi, he was a staunch ally of the latter during the split and war against Shekau’s JAS (Boko Haram) and was a significant pillar in consolidating the gains captured from Shekau following his death and the mass defections from JAS to ISWAP.

Continue Reading

News

Senate Rule Amendment: Debate Should Focus on Institutional Stability, Not Personalities – Eyiboh

Published

on

37 Views

The heated controversy triggered by the recent amendment to the Senate Standing Rules has been dominated by personalities and emotions rather than substantive institutional issues, Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh has said.

In a strongly worded statement, the Special Adviser on Media and Publicity to the Senate President argued that the core question before the Senate is not about Senator Godswill Akpabio or Senator Adams Oshiomhole, but whether Nigeria’s legislature should strengthen itself through rules that promote continuity, competence, and long-term stability.

Eyiboh noted that every serious institution worldwide periodically reviews and updates its rules in response to practical experience. “The refusal to review procedures in the face of experience is often a sign of stagnation, not democracy,” he said.

The amendment, which sets a minimum legislative experience threshold for senators aspiring to presiding and principal offices, should be examined through the lens of institutional development, he added.

The former House of Representatives member emphasised that the Senate Presidency is one of Nigeria’s most sensitive constitutional positions. It demands more than political popularity — it requires deep knowledge of parliamentary procedures, committee systems, constitutional interpretation, negotiation, and intergovernmental relations.

“Experience matters,” Eyiboh stressed.

He acknowledged that critics have valid concerns that experience requirements could entrench incumbents and create a closed oligarchy. However, he maintained that the proper response is not to reject minimum standards, but to set a reasonable bar — such as one full term or proven committee leadership — and commit to periodic review to prevent the rule from becoming a barrier to fresh talent.

“Experience without openness becomes arrogance; openness without experience becomes amateurism,” he said. The amendment, according to him, tilts towards correcting amateurism while safeguarding institutional stability.

Eyiboh dismissed suggestions that the rule change was merely intended to shrink competition or protect personal interests. He argued that institutions grow stronger by learning from experience and refining their processes, not by freezing rules indefinitely.

On calls for Senate President Godswill Akpabio to resign if the new qualification is enforced, Eyiboh described the argument as fundamentally flawed. He pointed out the well-established legal principle that laws and rules apply prospectively, not retroactively.

“Senator Akpabio emerged under the rules in existence at the time. Applying today’s standards to yesterday’s mandate is neither legally sustainable nor institutionally rational,” he said.

The statement urged Nigerians and senators to elevate the discussion above personal rivalries and chamber politics. While affirming Senator Oshiomhole’s right to hold dissenting views, Eyiboh insisted the debate must centre on whether the amendment strengthens the Senate as a durable institution.

“Institutions outlive individuals,” he concluded. “Senate Presidents will come and go. But the rules and traditions we establish today will shape legislative stability for decades to come.”

Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh, mnipr, is a former Member and Spokesperson of the House of Representatives and currently serves as Special Adviser on Media/Publicity and Official Spokesperson to the President of the Senate.

Continue Reading

Trending