At the resumed hearing, EFCC Counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, announced that the court had issued a public summons against Yahaya Bello, ordering it to be published and the charges to be posted.
At the resumed hearing, Rotimi Oyedepo, Counsel to the EFCC, informed the court that a public summons had been issued against Yahaya Bello, requiring its publication and the posting of charges.
However, Justice Maryann Anenih clarified that she had only ordered the summons to be posted, not the charge. Oyedepo then highlighted the expectation that Bello would appear in court on November 14, referencing the 30-day summons period, and requested the arraignment be postponed to that date for all three defendants.
Joseph Daudu, SAN, representing the second defendant, opposed the adjournment, stating that the matter was set for arraignment and they were ready. He emphasized that each defendant was independent and should be treated accordingly, saying, “You cannot use someone as a human shield when they are not in hostage. I don’t like this practice.”
Counsel for the third defendant supported Daudu’s position and requested the court consider his client’s bail application. Oyedepo, however, argued that the bail application could not proceed since the charge was joint and involved counts of conspiracy. He reiterated the need to adjourn until November 14, noting there was an application for the second defendant’s fundamental rights and that the oral bail request could not be entertained.
Daudu insisted this approach violated the principles of fair hearing, stating, “His argument is persuasive but does not align with the law. It undermines fair hearing as we have the right to raise any issue. Keeping them in limbo for years won’t achieve anything. They have previously been granted administrative bail by the EFCC, so it won’t harm anyone’s pride.”
He also asked for a date to file the fundamental rights application for his client. While the judge declined the oral bail request, she instructed the defendants to submit formal written applications and adjourned the case to November 14 and 20 for the first defendant’s response to the summons or arraignment.