Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has adjourned proceedings on the alleged money laundering case instituted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, against a former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, to September 25.
He said the proceedings would continue despite the appeal filed by the defendant.
Counsel to Yahaya Bello told the court that they had applied for a stay of proceedings on the case pending the determination of the appeal before the Appeal Court on an earlier granted arrest warrant by the lower court and other rulings.
When the hearing resumed on the matter at the Federal High Court yesterday, Counsel to the Defendant, Abdulwahab Mohammed, SAN, argued that the court could not proceed until the pending appeal was determined, citing authorities.
He also decried the treatment of his colleague at the last hearing, saying the prosecution misled the court.
“Your lordship is functus officio. Heavens will not fall if he awaits the court of appeal. We are relying on the provision of the Constitution which overrides the EFCC act which the prosecution is relying on,” the defendant’s counsel said.
However, counsel for the EFCC, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, opposed this vehemently, saying the defendant had not shown any court of appeal document showing that the court wants the lower court to stay the proceeding.
At this point, Justice Emeka Nwite asked whether, having received the application and affidavit, and being aware of the pending appeal, it would not amount to judicial rascality for his court to continue proceedings on the matter.
“Won’t it amount to judicial rascality to continue this case when there’s an issue of jurisdiction?” the judge further asked.
But Pinheiro said, “It is not really an issue of jurisdiction”, adding that in the face of Section 40, the mere filing of an affidavit could not suffice as the case was not a civil case.
He urged the court to stick to the matter of the day, which was the ruling on the arguments presented on June 27.
However, the defendant’s counsel told the court that the judge was misled on June 27th and that the request was for the proceedings of that day to be expunged.
“They are asking your lordship to undo the work of the Court of Appeal. To avoid controversy and in order not to render the appeal nugatory, this should not continue. Even if Yahaya Bello were to be here, you cannot arraign him,” he argued.
“The affidavit filed on 16th July 2024 is to bring to your lordship’s attention the notices of appeal filed against your lordship’s ruling on 23rd April and 10th May. This appeal was transmitted to the Court of Appeal 23rd of May and appellant’s brief of argument was filed on the 31st of May. Motion for stay has also been filed at the Court of Appeal. The two appeals basically challenge the jurisidiction of this court to entertain the charges ab initio.
“We urge your lordship to expunge the record of the proceedings on 27th June because, at that time, an appeal had been entered, and the proceedings should not have happened. The court was functus officio,” Wahab argued.
In his ruling, Justice Nwite said, “The grant of Stay of Proceedings is at the court’s discretion. And since it is an issue of discretion, no one can give an authority for the judge to rely on. The judge only needs to exercise this power judicially.”
The judge, who had asked before the recess that continuing the case when there was an issue of jurisdiction would not amount to judicial rascality, changed his position and noted that the defendant wanted to use the appeal to delay proceedings.
Consequently, he adjourned the case to September 25 for arraignment.
