By Stephen Simon
The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, has dismissed an application filed by former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, seeking to strike out the criminal charge instituted against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Justice Maryann E. Anenih, in a ruling delivered on Tuesday, held that the court has the requisite jurisdiction to hear the case and rejected Bello’s argument that the proceedings amounted to an abuse of court process.
Bello had, through his lead counsel, Joseph Bodunrin Daudu (SAN), urged the court to strike out the 16-count charge marked FCT/CR/778/2024, contending that the alleged offences were not committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the FCT High Court.
He also argued that the charge constituted an abuse of court process in view of a related criminal case pending before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Opposing the application, counsel to the EFCC, Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), described the application as misconceived and intended to delay the trial.
Pinheiro argued that the offences contained in the charge were brought under the Penal Code and were therefore properly triable before the FCT High Court.
He further submitted that properties allegedly acquired with proceeds of the offences and forming part of the subject matter of the charge are located within the Federal Capital Territory, thereby conferring territorial jurisdiction on the court.
On the allegation of abuse of court process, the EFCC maintained that the cases before the FCT High Court and the Federal High Court are distinct and involve different offences.
According to the anti-graft agency, while the case before the FCT High Court centres on allegations of criminal breach of trust and conspiracy under the Penal Code, the matter before the Federal High Court relates to alleged money laundering offences under the Money Laundering Act.
The prosecution also argued that the parties in the two cases are not the same, noting that Bello is the sole defendant in the Federal High Court case, whereas he is standing trial alongside two co-defendants in the FCT High Court proceedings.
In her ruling, Justice Anenih agreed with the submissions of the EFCC and held that the court possesses the jurisdiction required to entertain the charge.
The judge further ruled that the existence of the separate proceedings before the Federal High Court does not amount to an abuse of court process, as the cases involve different offences and parties.
Consequently, the court dismissed Bello’s application for lacking merit.
A similar application filed by the third defendant in the case was also dismissed.
Following the ruling, Justice Anenih directed that the trial should proceed and called on the prosecution to continue with its case.
The EFCC subsequently presented its 16th prosecution witness, who was present in court and ready to testify.
