Legal Battle Over Travel Permission for Former Kogi Governor
A High Court in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has set a date for its ruling on an application by Yahaya Bello, the former governor of Kogi State. The court is scheduled to deliver its decision on July 17 regarding whether Bello can travel abroad for medical treatment.
The case was brought before Justice Maryanne Anenih, who heard arguments from both sides during a hearing on Tuesday. Bello is currently facing prosecution by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) alongside two other individuals, Umar Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu. They are all charged with 16 counts of criminal breach of trust involving approximately N110.4 billion.
Application for Medical Travel
Bello’s legal team, represented by Joseph Daudu (SAN), submitted an application on June 20, 2025, requesting that the court release his passport so he can travel internationally for medical attention. This move came after Bello surrendered his passport to the court as part of the conditions for his bail.
Daudu emphasized that the request was made in good faith and aimed at ensuring Bello receives necessary medical care. He argued that the application was not an abuse of the court’s process but rather a necessary step given the circumstances.
Prosecution’s Concerns
On the other hand, the prosecution, led by Chukwudi Enebeli (SAN), raised concerns about the application. Enebeli criticized the move, suggesting it could be seen as an attempt to misuse the judicial system. He pointed out that Bello had previously filed a similar application in the Federal High Court in Abuja, where he is also being prosecuted on separate charges.
Enebeli warned that if one court grants the application while the other denies it, it could create confusion and undermine the integrity of the judicial process. He further argued that Bello should have informed his sureties about his intention to travel, as they would need to decide whether they wished to continue supporting him financially and legally.
Defense Response
In response, Daudu defended Bello’s actions, stating that the EFCC’s decision to file separate charges against the defendant in different courts made it necessary for Bello to apply in both jurisdictions. He contended that it would be pointless to file an application in only one court.
Daudu also clarified that Bello’s sureties were already aware of the application and did not require additional notice. He emphasized that Bello had always complied with the court’s orders and had not shown any disregard for the judicial process.
Ongoing Legal Proceedings
As the court prepares to make its decision, the case highlights the complex interplay between legal obligations and personal health needs. The outcome of this ruling could set a precedent for similar cases involving high-profile defendants seeking medical travel permission.
The situation underscores the challenges faced by individuals in the legal system, particularly those who are under prosecution but also require urgent medical attention. It remains to be seen how the court will balance these competing interests when it delivers its verdict on July 17.
