Anti-graft agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has sought for deferment of hearing in its new charge against the former Lead Representative of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello and two others, to November 14, 2024.
At the resumed hearing, Counsel to the Commission, Rotimi Oyedepo, said the court dolled out a public summon against Bello, ordering that same be published and that the charge be pasted.
The trial Judge, Justice Maryanne Anenih, nonetheless, interjected, expressing that she did not approve that the charge be pasted, only the request.
Oyedepo said he anticipated Bello should be in court on November 14, making reference to the 30-day duration of the request, and therefore looked for deferment till November 14 for arraignment of the three defendants.
Joseph Daudu and senior advocate of Nigeria, who showed up for the 2nd defendant, nonetheless, objected to this.
He expressed that the matter was for arraignment, and that they were prepared, noting that the defendants were all autonomous and ought to be treated as such.
“You cannot be using somebody as a human shield when they are not in hostage. I don’t like this practice,” he said.
Counsel to the 3rd defendant, concurred with Daudu, he expressed in the alternative that the court take his client’s application for bail.
The EFCC Counsel, Oyedepo, in any case, said that the application for bail could not be taken as the charge was a joint charge.
As indicated by him, there are counts of conspiracy in it.
Demanding that the court ought to adjourn to November 14, the EFCC lawyer notified the court that there was an application for the implementation of fundamental rights of the 2nd defendant and that the oral application cannot be taken.
The 2nd defendant’s counsel, Daudu, in any case, demanded that this refuted the principles of fair hearing.
“His argument is persuasive but does not go by what the law says. That until one individual appears before they can be arraigned. I don’t understand this kind of practice.
“It is an affront to fair hearing because the privilege of fair hearing allows us to raise any issue. Keeping them for 10 years will have no impact.
“They have enjoyed administrative bail before with the EFCC, so it won’t hurt their pride if they give them,” he stated.
The 2nd defendant’s counsel likewise asked for a date for fundamental rights application for his client.
However, the trial judge turned down the oral application for bail, she said the defendants ought to come formally by filling applications as a hard copy.
Justice Maryanne Anenih, subsequently adjourned to 14th and 20th November for response of the 1st defendant to summons and/or arraignment.
