Justice Maryann Anenih of the Federal Capital Territory Excessive Courtroom in Maitama, Abuja, on Thursday, adjourned until November 14, for arraignment of the defendants and response to the summon issued by the Courtroom for the speedy previous Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello.
He’s to look earlier than it for arraignment on the recent 16-count expenses introduced towards him by the Financial and Monetary Crimes Fee.
The adjournment was mounted on the request of the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), who said that on the final adjourned date, the court docket had issued a public summons towards the first defendant (Bello), directing that very same be printed and that the cost be pasted.
Justice Anenih, nevertheless, interjected, stating that she didn’t ask that the cost be pasted, solely the summons.
Oyedepo defined to the court docket that he anticipated the first defendant to be in court docket on November 14, making reference to the 30-day length of the summons, and subsequently sought adjournment until November 14 for the arraignment of all three defendants.
Counsel to the 2nd defendant, JB Daudu (SAN), nevertheless, objected, stating that the matter was scheduled for arraignment and that if the prosecution will not be able to learn the cost to the defendants, he must ask that they be discharged they usually have been in custody for over one month.
He added that the defendants have been all unbiased and shouldn’t be used as a defend for the sake of 1 who’s absent.
“My Lord, we’re right here for arraignment. I don’t assume the prosecution ought to use them as a defend as they’re individually right here on their very own. I’ll ask for his or her discharge if he (the prosecution) will not be prepared for arraignment. We both take plea or their discharge.
“You can’t be utilizing any person as a human defend when they aren’t in hostage. I don’t like this apply,” he mentioned.
The counsel to the third defendant, A.M. Aliyu (SAN), agreed with the submission of the 2nd defendant’s counsel, including that he can be asking the court docket to take his shopper’s utility for bail.
“Within the various, my Lord, I’ve filed an utility for bail which was duly served on the complainant,” he mentioned.
Oyedepo, nevertheless, mentioned that the applying for bail couldn’t be taken because the cost was a joint cost. In line with him, there are counts of conspiracy in it.
He insisted that the court docket ought to adjourn to November 14.
He additional said that the protection counsel has served the EFCC with an utility for the enforcement of elementary rights of the 2nd defendant on him and that the oral utility can’t be taken.
The 2nd defendant’s counsel, Daudu, nevertheless, insisted that this was towards the ideas of honest listening to.
He mentioned, “Elementary human proper will not be about freedom alone however honest listening to. I urge my Lord to take a worldwide take a look at the matter. They left their household for over a month now.
“We urge the court docket to launch the 2 on bail and that preserving them is not going to have any affect on the case.
“His argument is persuasive however doesn’t go by what the legislation says. That’s till one particular person seems earlier than they are often arraigned. I don’t perceive this sort of apply.
“It’s an affront to honest listening to as a result of the privilege of honest listening to permits us to lift any concern. Preserving them for 10 years can have no affect.
“They’ve loved administrative bail earlier than with the EFCC, so it gained’t damage their satisfaction if they provide it to them.”
The 2nd defendant’s counsel additionally requested for a date for a elementary rights utility for his shopper.
After taking the submissions of the events concerned, Justice Anenih rejected the defendants’ oral utility for bail.
She ordered the defendants to come back with a proper utility as their oral utility was not accepted.
She mentioned, “I’ve thought-about your utility for bail; it’s famous that, as rightly said by the prosecution, the defendants are at liberty to make correct utility for bail on this court docket; in any other case, the oral utility made as we speak is hereby refused.”
She subsequently adjourned to November 14 and 20 for the response of the first defendant to summons and/or arraignment.
