A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has fixed July 17 to rule on an application former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello filed to seek the court’s permission to travel abroad.
Justice Maryanne Anenih fixed the date yesterday after taking arguments for and against the application.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Bello as well as Umar Oricha (Director General, Kogi State Government House), and Abdulsalami Hudu on a 16-count charge.
The EFCC is, in the charge, alleging criminal breach of trust to the tune of N110.4 billion against the defendants.
At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, Bello’s lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN), told the court about his client’s application filed on June 20.
Daudu said: “It seeks an order for the release of the first defendant’s/applicant’s international passport by the Registrar of this court to enable him to travel for medical attention.”
Bello submitted his passport to the court in fulfilment of the conditions the court attached to the bail granted him.
Prosecuting lawyer, Chukwudi Enebeli (SAN), faulted the application, saying it was an abuse of the court’s process.
Read Also: Tinubu won’t be derailed by political distractions — NSA Ribadu
Enebeli reminded the court that Bello had filed a similar application before a Federal High Court in Abuja, before which he is also being prosecuted on a separate charge.
The lawyer added that by filing the same application at both the FCT High Court and Federal High Court, the ex-governor was setting the courts on a collision course.
He said if the Federal High Court refuses the application and the High Court of the FCT grants it, such a development could make a mockery of the judicial system.
Enebeli argued that the defendant should have notified his sureties about his application to travel out of the country.
According to him, the sureties are required to decide if they want to continue to stand for him when he travels.
Responding, Daudu contended that the decision of his client to file the application could not amount to an abuse of the court process because it was the complainant (the EFCC) that chose to file separate charges against the defendant in different counts.
Daudu added: “It will be a futile exercise to apply in one court and not to apply in the other court.”
He said Bello’s sureties were already aware of the application and did not need to be put on notice.
The defence lawyer, who prayed the court to grant the application, added: “He (Bello) has never flouted your lordship’s order.”