By Kolawole Ojebisi
The arraignment of a former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, suffered a momentary setback and could not progress as planned on Friday at the Federal High Court, Abuja due to the absence of his defence counsel, Abdulwahab Mohammed (SAN).
Mohammed was reportedly unaware of the hearing date, leading to his absence in court.
Bello faces a 19-count charge of money laundering amounting to N84 billion, brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission(EFCC).
In a separate case before the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama, Abuja, Bello has already been arraigned on a 16-count charge of fraud involving N110.4 billion.
As Justice Emeka Nwite prepared to proceed with the arraignment on Friday, he noticed the absence of the defence counsel and inquired about his whereabouts.
Bello informed the court that he only learnt of the arraignment late Thursday night and was unable to reach his legal team.
Meanwhile, the EFCC counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, took Bello’s submission as a convenient excuse, thereby urging the court to proceed with the arraignment in the absence of Bello’s lawyer.
“What the law requires is the presence of the defendant, not the presence of his lawyers,” Pinheiro argued.
However, Justice Nwite declined the request, citing the defendant’s right to a fair hearing.
“The matter came up on the 30th of October 2024. It was adjourned to 21st January 2025. From the statement of the defendant, his lawyers are not aware of today’s date. In the interest of fair hearing, I will not proceed for arraignment,” Justice Nwite said.
The court waited for 45 minutes, but with no sign of the defence counsel, Justice Nwite adjourned the matter.
At the previous sitting on October 30, Pinheiro had requested that the court proceed with the trial, noting that two witnesses were present and ready to testify. He also suggested that the court enter a plea of not guilty on Bello’s behalf and commence the trial.
Justice Nwite, in response to Pinheiro’s submissions, emphasised the importance of legal representation for the defendant.
“This matter is peculiar in the sense that we have already agreed on a date, which is in January. It will be unfair if the matter is taken without the defendant’s counsel. It would be a different thing if the defendant had no counsel,” the judge stated.
He further remarked, “Since the defendant has said his counsel is not aware of today’s proceeding, I am of the view that a bench warrant cannot be sacrificed on the altar of fair hearing. The defendant deserves to be represented by counsel.”
Following the adjournment, Pinheiro requested that the court designate a new date for the hearing of motions and possible arraignment and also asked that Bello remain in EFCC custody until then.
Justice Nwite granted the application, ordering that hearing notices be served on the defendant’s counsel.
He also directed that Bello remain in EFCC custody until the next hearing on December 13.
