Yahaya Bello: Courtroom to rule on EFCC’s request to cross-examine college’s inner auditor
The Federal Excessive Courtroom in Abuja has mounted June 26 for ruling on a request by the {Economic} and {Financial} Crimes Fee (EFCC) to cross-examine its witness—an inner auditor from the American Worldwide College—in its cash laundering case in opposition to former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello.
Justice Emeka Nwite mounted the date after listening to arguments from each events regarding the EFCC’s request to cross-examine Mr. Nicholas Ojehomon, an Inside Auditor with the American Worldwide College, Abuja (AISA).
Nairametrics had beforehand reported that the court docket allowed Bello to tender as proof a judgment from the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Excessive Courtroom, which his authorized group mentioned addresses points surrounding his kids’s college charges on the American Worldwide College (AIS).
Justice Nwite overruled the EFCC’s objection to the admissibility of the judgment as proof within the N80 billion alleged cash laundering case in opposition to Bello.
The previous governor and others are accused of conspiring in February 2016 to transform N80,246,470,088.88, allegedly obtained by way of a legal breach of belief, in violation of Part 18(a) and punishable underneath Part 15(3) of the Cash Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended).
Funds made to AIS, together with associated charges, are among the many EFCC’s grounds for prosecuting Bello, alleging that the funds had been proceeds of crime.
Bello has denied all prices.
Authorized Disputes
Beforehand, the EFCC known as Nicholas Ojehomon, a witness from AIS, to testify.
Via EFCC lawyer Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, the witness offered reveals together with the college’s statements of account, admission letters for Bello’s kids, and fee receipts.
In the course of the proceedings, Bello’s lawyer, Joseph Daudu, SAN, sought to tender an authorized true copy of the FCT Excessive Courtroom judgment involving AIS to dispute the EFCC’s declare that the college charges had been proceeds of crime.
The go well with, FCT/HC/CV/2574/2023, between Mr. Ali Bello and the Included Trustees of the American Worldwide College, reportedly addressed the college charges problem.
Pinheiro objected, insisting that the FCT Excessive Courtroom case was civil, whereas the EFCC’s case is legal.
Justice Nwite dominated that the EFCC’s objection was untimely, stating that the judgment was related to the case.
He overruled the objection and admitted the doc into proof.
What Transpired in Courtroom
On the resumed court docket session on Friday, Bello’s lawyer, J. B. Daudu, SAN, concluded his cross-examination of Mr. Nicholas Ojehomon after asking particular questions concerning the FCT Excessive Courtroom judgment admitted into proof as Exhibit 19.
- The witness additionally learn aloud a portion of the FCT Excessive Courtroom judgment, which held that there was no order for AISA to return charges to the EFCC, nor any ruling declaring the cash as proceeds of cash laundering.
- In authorized phrases, a cross-examination is when the protection or opposing counsel questions a witness’s testimony by way of a collection of queries.
- Justice Nwite then requested EFCC counsel, Olukayode Enitan, SAN, whether or not he supposed to re-examine the witness.
- Re-examination in legislation means giving a witness a chance to make clear points raised throughout cross-examination.
- Enitan responded that he supposed to cross-examine Ojehomon based mostly on Exhibit 19.
“I’m not re-examining him; I’m cross-examining him as a result of they introduced this doc, my lord,” he mentioned.
- Daudu disagreed, arguing that the prosecution’s place was not supported by the legislation as outlined within the Proof Act.
- He contended that for the prosecution to cross-examine its personal witness, the witness should first be declared “hostile.”
- A hostile witness in legislation is one who contradicts the get together that offered them to the court docket.
“If you wish to cross-examine your personal witness, it’s important to first declare him a hostile witness.
“You can not cross-examine him based mostly on the doc,” Daudu insisted.
- Enitan responded that truthful listening to ideas enable the prosecution to query the witness additional.
“Honest listening to calls for that the complainant too has the proper to look at this, as a result of Part 36 of the Structure talks about truthful listening to,” he mentioned.
- Daudu maintained that, underneath Nigerian legislation, the prosecution might solely re-examine the witness.
“We aren’t saying they can not re-examine the witness.
“That’s what Part 36 says a couple of truthful listening to. However whether it is to cross-examine him, he should present us the legislation that allows that.
“He can not come underneath the guise of a good listening to to cross-examine the witness,” Daudu mentioned.
- After listening to each side on the matter, Justice Nwite adjourned proceedings till June 26 for ruling.
- The court docket additionally mounted June 27, July 3, and July 4 for the continuation of the trial.
Backstory
The EFCC and different safety businesses had beforehand declared Bello needed, citing an incapability to arrest him.
The EFCC later accused the Kogi State authorities of protecting Bello by invoking immunity.
Ultimately, Bello was arrested, and one other fraud case was filed in opposition to him on the FCT Excessive Courtroom. Each issues stay pending.
