Alhaji Yahaya Bello, the beleaguered former governor of Kogi State, stated he was prepared to face the Federal High Court in Abuja to address the 19-count charge the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, or EFCC, had brought against him.
Despite not being present at his arraignment, Bello briefed a team of lawyers who appeared in court on his behalf on Tuesday.
Mr. Adeola Adedipe, SAN, a member of his legal team, informed the court that although his client would have been willing to attend the hearings, he was worried about getting arrested.
Adedipe, SAN, stated, “The defendant wants to come to court but he is afraid that there is an order of arrest hanging on his head.”
As a result, he asked the court to revoke the exparte order of arrest it had previously imposed on the former governor.
Adedipe, SAN, argued that the charge had not been served on his client as required by law at the time the warrant of arrest was made.
He pointed out that the court had only approved the defendant’s substituted service of the charge through his lawyer at the Tuesday’s resumed hearings.
“As at the time the warrant was issued, the order for substituted service had not been made. That order was just made this morning.
“A warrant of arrest should not be hanging on his neck when we leave this court,” counsel to the defendant added.
In addition, the former governor insisted that the EFCC is an unlawful group.
He claimed that before enacting the EFCC Act via the National Assembly, the federal government did not confer with the 36 states of the union.
He said that in order for the Act to take effect, the individual state Houses of Assembly have to ratify it in accordance with section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
“This is a serious problem that touches on both the federalist principles and the constitution. As things stand, the EFCC is an illegitimate institution, thus it needs to be resolved,” Bello’s lawyer continued.
Mr. Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, the lawyer for EFCC, asked the court to reject the application, arguing that the arrest warrant should not be revoked until the defendant appears for his trial.
The defendant cannot continue to hide while making multiple application submissions. Until and until the defendant appears in court for his arraignment, he is not permitted to request the cancellation of the arrest order. On that applied application, he is unheard.
Finding the defendant’s whereabouts should be the primary concern. His submitting all these applications is nothing more than a ploy to drag out the process and postpone his arraignment.
“Leave him to come here and make the application if he wants the order of arrest to be discharged.
“Our position is that the defendant should be denied the right of being heard, until he is physically present before this court.”
The EFCC’s lawyer further contended that the court could not effectively assume jurisdiction to hear any application or objection in the case until the defendant was arraigned in accordance with section 396 of the ACJA, 2015.
The anti-graft agency stated that it would not execute the arrest warrant if counsel to the defendant undertake to ensure his presence on the next adjourned date.
“I can guarantee him that the arrest warrant won’t be carried out if he provides an assurance that his client would appear in court the next day.
Pinheiro, SAN, the attorney for the EFCC, continued, “If he gives that assurance, as the prosecution, I will personally apply for the warrant to be discharged.”
The EFCC informed the court that its legality had already been resolved by the Supreme Court.
The person accused of money laundering is the target of the case before this court, not the state or the House of Assembly.
The EFCC continued, “It is against a person who is alleged to have used public funds to purchase homes in Lagos and Maitama and also transferred funds to his accounts overseas.”
