April 21, (THEWILL) – There is no telling how the legal tussle between the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yayaha Bello, popularly known as the White Lion, over the latter’s involvement in an alleged case of money laundering to the tune of N80.2 billion will end. But there is a clear indication that the anti-graft agency is determined to have its way, even if it means making good its threat to draft the military to forcefully haul the former governor in the dock.
A dependable source at the Commission confided in THEWILL at the weekend that the statement by its counsel, Kemi Pinhero, that the agency might deploy the military was not empty, considering the “refusal of the former governor to honour its invitation and let the law run its course.”
He said the EFCC knows where the ex-governor is hiding in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory. The anti-graft agency, he disclosed, is facing a test that will shape how it carries out its mandate in the future. He was particularly pleased with the level of cooperation from the relevant agencies of the Federal Government, saying that it would strengthen the sense of independence of the Commission in doing its work in accordance with the rule of law.
Letting the law run its course was also interpreted by Bello from his hide-out on Friday to mean that the EFCC cannot arrest him because a court order prevents the agency from doing so.
Speaking through his counsel, Abdulwahab Muhammad, Bello told Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, that there is an order from a court restraining the EFCC from arresting or arraigning him.
According to Muhammad, a Kogi State High Court had on February 9, 2024, restrained the EFCC from arresting or arraigning the former governor until the Court of Appeal, which the EFCC asked to upturn the High Court judgement, rules on the matter.
He pointed out that the EFCC was therefore acting unconstitutionally, and the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain any charge from the Commission.
Pinhero disagreed with Muhammad’s submission and argued that the EFCC had obeyed the ruling in the substantive matter on the suit as delivered by the Kogi State High Court on March 17, 2024, that for Bello be arrested or arraigned, the EFCC must first seek leave from the court to do so.
“It was in line with that judgement that the EFCC, through an ex parte application, filed for the order seeking the arrest of the former governor which the court granted,” Pinhero said.
Mr Femi Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, supports Pinheiro’s submission. He said in a statement on Friday, that Bello’s “allegation is completely baseless as the Kogi State High Court did not grant such wide powers.”
He said that what the Kogi State High Court granted was an order to enforce the fundamental right of Bello to personal liberty and freedom of movement.
That order, Falana submitted, was made without prejudice to the power of the Federal High Court to make any order as it may deem just in the determination of the rights of the applicant and the respondents as may be submitted to her for consideration and determination.
“Therefore, by filing charges of money laundering of over N80 billion against Mr Yahaya Bello at the Federal High Court, the EFCC has diligently complied with the order of the Kogi State High Court,” Falana said, adding, “In the same vein, the order made by the Federal High court for the arrest of Mr Yahaya Bello for the purpose of his arraignment is equally in line with the order of the Kogi State High Court.”
EFCC’s CASE AGAINST BELLO
Bello is being arraigned by the EFCC alongside Ali Bello, Dauda Suleiman and Abdulsalam Hudu on 19-count charges bordering on money laundering to the tune of over N80 billion.
Count one of the charges reads: “That you, Yahaya Adoza Bello, Ali Bello, Dauda Suliman and Abdulsalam Hudu ( still at large), sometime in February, 2016, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired amongst yourselves to convert the total sum of N80, 246,470, 088.88, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of your unlawful activity to wit, criminal breach of trust and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(a) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the Money Laundering ( Prohibition) Act, 2011 as amended”.
Count 17 of the charges read: “That you Yahaya Bello between July 26, 2021 and April 6, 2022 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court aided E-Traders International Limited to conceal the aggregate sum of N3081,804,654.00 in account number 1451458080 domiciled in Access Bank Plc, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of unlawful activity to wit, criminal breach of trust and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(a), 15(2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 as amended and punishable under Section 15( 3) of the same Act.”
Count 18 of the charges reads: “That you Yahaya Adoza Bello sometime in November 2021 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court indirectly procured E-Traders international Limited to transfer the aggregate sum of $570,330.00 to account number 4266644272 domiciled in TD Bank, United States of America, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of unlawful activity to wit, criminal breach of trust and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15(2) (d) of the Money Laundering ( Prohibition) Act, 2011 as amended and punishable under Section 15( 3) of the same Act.”
Bello failed to appear before Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Maitama, on Thursday, April 18, sparking off a looming, long-drawn legal tussle.
Bello’s botched arraignment came on the heels of his warrant of arrest granted the EFCC by the court on Wednesday, April 17, 2024.
Efforts by the Commission to arrest him at his Abuja residence was botched when Governor Usman Ododo breached the cordon around the house and reportedly whisked his predecessor away.
A day before the former governor’s arraignment, EFCC operatives had laid siege to his home on Benghazi Street, Wuse Zone 4, Abuja, but they could not arrest him until Governor Ododo reportedly drove to his predecessor’s compound with heavy security operatives and spirited him away.
Referring to this twist in the matter, prosecution counsel, Pinheiro, SAN, expressed regret that a lawful attempt to serve the defendant the charges, along with a court order of arrest was botched “by a person of immunity, who came and whisked him away in his car,” noting that by virtue of Section 287 of the constitution all persons are obliged to obey a court order.
Also, Section 12 of ACJA, he said, allowed law enforcement agencies to break down premises to bring unwilling defendants to justice.
Pinheiro assured that the state “will invoke all its powers within the law” to ensure that the defendant is produced in court. He said, “The state will ensure that he is produced in court for the purpose of arraignment and it is in his own interest so that he can take his plea”.
Following Bello’s absence, Pinheiro sought leave of the court to serve the former governor the charges through his counsel, Abdulwahab Muhammed, SAN. Muhammed, however, declined saying that he did not have the authority of his client to accept the charges.
Muhammed further argued that his client cannot be arraigned in court until EFCC’s appeal against an order of the High Court, restraining the Commission from arresting, detaining and prosecuting him is determined and also until the determination of his client’s preliminary objection, challenging the jurisdiction of Justice Nwite’s court to entertain his trial.
Pinheiro, however, submitted that it was legal and constitutional to serve the defendant through his lawyer, especially as the defence counsel introduced himself in court unconditionally and without limitations as the representative of the defendant. “Having introduced himself unconditionally as the representative of the defendant, my learned colleague knows that he cannot be a defence counsel for arraignment and not for bail. If he is served the charges on behalf of the defendant, if he likes he can now advise his client to stay permanently away from the court,” he said.
The judge adjourned the matter till Tuesday, April 23, 2024, for ruling as to whether the prosecution can serve the defendant through his lawyer for arraignment.
ODODO REACTS
On Friday evening Governor Ododo denied any involvement in preventing the EFCC from arresting Bello. The Commissioner for Information and Communications. Kingsley Fanwo said EFCC lied that Governor Ododo was involved in their failed attempt to arrest Bello.
Fanwo described the accusation by the EFCC as laughable. “Were they sure that the former governor was in his residence? They were not sure that Governor Ododo whisked him away. So, the allegation is false.
“The Governor of Kogi State, Usman Ododo is a law- abiding citizen and leader who respects the rule of law at constitutional level. He wouldn’t be involved in that kind of act. So, the accusation is laughable, and it is one of the most frivolous things I have heard from the EFCC,” he said.
A LOST BATTLE?
While the legal battle rages, the Federal Government has waded into the matter on the side of the EFCC. After failing to get Bello to answer its summons, the anti-graft agency declared the former governor wanted. In a domino effect, other structures of government began adding their weight to ensure the former governor does not flee the country.
A few hours after the EFCC declared Bello wanted, the Nigerian Immigration Service, in an April 18, 2024, letter signed by Assistant Comptroller of Immigration, D.S Umar, for the Comptroller-General, Kemi Nandap, alerted the police and the Department of State Services to effect the former governor’s arrest.
The NIS, in its letter, detailed the name, nationality and passport number of the former governor (B50083321).
Thereafter, the chief law officer of the country followed suit: According to the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the reaction by the former governor was disgusting and a deliberate breach of the law, which can only compound the case.
He said the EFCC is given power by the law to invite any person of interest to interact with them in the course of its investigation into any matter, regardless of status.
“Therefore, the least that we can all do when invited, is not to put any obstruction in the way of the EFCC but to honourably answer the invitation.
“A situation where public officials who are themselves subject to protection by law enforcement agents will set up a stratagem of obstruction to the civil and commendable efforts of the EFCC to perform its duty is, to say the least, insufferably disquieting.”
The AGF gave Bello an advice; “A flight from the law does not resolve issues at stake but only exacerbates it.”
The Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, followed up by withdrawing the police details attached to the former governor. Thus, apart from placing him on a watch list, the Federal Government has ‘disabled’ the former governor.
In the meantime, some CSOs and human rights crusaders have thrown their support for the former Kogi governor on the grounds that the EFCC was yet to vacate the restraining order in the Court of Appeal before going to lay siege to the former governor’s residence and effect his arrest.
The CSOs, which included Executive Chairman, the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership, Debo Adeniran; Sina Loremikan, (Campaign Against Impunity); Declan Ihekhaire, (Activists for Good Governance); Gbenga Soloki, CADOV; Ochiagha Ohaneze, (Ohaneze Youth Council); Funmi Jolade, (Women Democratic Vanguard); Kola Abe, (Centre for Socioeconomic Rights); Ologun Ayodeji, (Transparency and Accountability Group); Femi Lawson, (Centre for Public Accountability) and Gbenga Ganzallo (Media Rights Campaign) addressed the media last week and insisted what the EFCC had done amounted to breaking and not enforcing the law.
AN END GAME
Falana said that no court of law can prevent the EFCC from arraigning and prosecuting Bello.
He said, “By virtue of section 35(1) (c) of the Constitution, the police, anti-graft agencies and other prosecutorial bodies cannot be prevented by a court of law from arresting a criminal suspect once there is reasonable suspicion that he or she has committed a criminal offence.”
The famous human rights lawyer stated that the allegation made by Bello that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has disobeyed a court order by attempting to arrest him to answer the charge of N84 billion theft is legally untenable.
He said that as a former governor, Bello has lost his immunity from arrest and prosecution. No court can confer a life immunity on a former governor in Nigeria.
“The Supreme Court had pointed out that the order of a High Court to the effect that a criminal suspect should not be arrested cannot bar a court of coordinate jurisdiction from trying him. In the case of Orji Kalu v Federal Republic of Nigeria (2016) 39 WRN 53, the Appellant challenged the EFCC for charging him before the Federal High Court, in spite of the order of the High Court of Abia State restraining the anti-graft agency from violating his fundamental right to personal liberty.
“In view of the foregoing, the police officers who prevented the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission from arresting the suspect have committed a grave criminal offence,” Falana said.
About the Author
Amos Esele is the Deputy Editor of THEWILL Newspaper. He has over two decades of experience on the job.
