Court adjourns to July 17 for ruling on Yahaya Bello’s application to travel

Court

By KEMI KAYODE

Justice Maryann Anenih of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, on Tuesday, adjourned ruling on an application filed by the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, seeking to travel out of the country, on health grounds.At the resumed hearing of the money laundering case filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission against the former governor, his counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, told the court that he had filed an application, dated 19th June, 2025 and filed on June 20, 2025.“It seeks an order for the release of the 1st defendant/applicant’s international passport by the registrar to enable him to travel for medical attention,” he said.The counsel said the application was supported by an affidavit of 13 grounds in the face of the motion and supported by a 22 paragraphs affidavit deposed to by the applicant himself.The EFCC Counsels had filed a counter-affidavit, saying granting the request could delay further proceedings.Daudu, SAN, in response to the prosecution team’s counter-affidavit, said the Defendant’s team had also filed a further affidavit of 20 paragraphs, filed on July 7, 2025, and deposed to by the applicant himself with two exhibits.“Exhibits C is the CTC of the ruling of your lordship, admitting the defendant to bail, and Exhibit D is the ruling of FHC admitting him to bail.“We adopt these documents in urging your lordship to grant our application,” he stated.Responding to the Prosecution’s argument that the application was an abuse of court process in the sense that a similar application was filed at FHC, he argued that it could not be an abuse of court process.He hinged his argument on the fact that it was the complainant that instituted those charges in the separate courts.“It will be a futile exercise to apply in one court and not to apply in the other court,” Daudu, SAN submitted.The prosecution counsel, Chukwudi Enebele, SAN, while defending the EFCC’s counter-affidavit, said the Defendant should have put his sureties on notice with regard to his application to travel out of the country.According to him, the sureties need to decide whether they would want to continue to stand as sureties for him when he travels.He added that, by filing the same application at both the FCT High Court and Federal High Court, the Defendant’s Counsels were setting the courts on a collision course.“If FHC refuses that application and my lord grants it, it will make mockery of our Judicial system,” the EFCC lawyer argued.Responding, Daudu SAN said, on the issue of suretyship, the sureties were already aware.“We need not put them on notice,” he said.“Finally, on the interpol matter, it is a dead argument.“He has never flouted your lordship’s order. They themselves have even forgotten about those red alerts,” the lawyer added, urging the court to grant the application.After listening to both parties, Justice Anenih adjourned the case to July 17, 2025 for ruling.