Legal Proceedings and Medical Travel Application
The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sitting at Maitama, Abuja, has adjourned its ruling on an application filed by the immediate past governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello. The application seeks the court’s permission for Bello to travel to the United Kingdom for medical treatment. The hearing was scheduled to conclude on Thursday, July 17.
Bello is currently facing charges alongside Umar Shuaibu Oricha and Andulsalam Hudu in a case marked FCT/HC/CR/778/24. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting the trio for alleged criminal breach of trust involving a sum of N110,446,470,089. These charges are based on Section 311 of the Penal Code Cap 89 Law of Northern Nigeria, 1963, with penalties outlined under Section 312 of the same law.
All three defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charges as presented in open court. The judge, Justice Maryann Anenih, set the date for a final ruling after hearing arguments from both sides during the resumed hearing.
Arguments Presented by Counsel
Joseph Daudu SAN, representing Bello, moved the motion on notice dated June 19, requesting the court to grant temporary release of Bello’s passport for his medical trip. Daudu argued that part of the conditions set by the court when granting Bello bail on December 19, 2024, required him to approach the court through a motion on notice if he needed to travel abroad. He emphasized that there were no specific conditions prohibiting Bello from traveling or any limitations on potential circumstances.
In response to the prosecution’s claim that the application constitutes an abuse of court process—especially since similar applications were previously made to the Federal High Court—Daudu maintained that the current application is not an abuse. He highlighted that the same prosecution had initiated additional charges against Bello in the Federal High Court, suggesting that it would be inconsistent to label this motion as an abuse.
Daudu further stated that each application is within the court’s discretion to approve or deny. He added that applying in one court while ignoring another would be futile. Additionally, he asserted that the issue of court abuse does not interfere with the court’s discretionary powers.
Prosecution’s Counterarguments
Chukwudi Enebeli SAN, representing the prosecution, urged the court to reject the application. He argued that Bello should have informed his sureties about the travel request to ensure their willingness to continue supporting him. Enebeli also raised concerns about the potential conflict between courts, noting that filing the same application in both the Federal High Court and the High Court of the FCT could lead to conflicting rulings.
He warned that if the Federal High Court denies the application while the FCT court grants it, it could undermine the integrity of the judicial system. Enebeli further pointed out that Bello cannot apply for a passport release unless the document is in the court’s possession. He suggested that the first step should be to obtain the passport from the other court before submitting the application to the FCT court.
Final Ruling
After considering the arguments from both sides, Justice Anenih decided to adjourn the case until July 17 for a final decision. The outcome of this ruling will determine whether Bello can proceed with his planned medical trip to the UK. The court’s decision will also reflect its stance on the balance between legal procedures and individual rights, particularly in cases involving high-profile defendants.
