A Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Maitama, Abuja, has dismissed an application filed by former Kogi State governor, Yahaya Bello, challenging the court’s authority to hear the N110.4 billion alleged fraud case brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Bello is standing trial alongside Umar Shuaibu Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu on a 16-count charge bordering on alleged criminal breach of trust and money laundering involving N110.4 billion. The anti-graft agency accuses the defendants of financial crimes linked to public funds during Bello’s tenure as governor of Kogi State.
In his application before the court, Bello argued that the FCT High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the charges and therefore sought an order striking out the case. His legal team maintained that the alleged offences did not fall within the court’s territorial competence.
However, the prosecution, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Kemi Pinheiro, opposed the application, describing it as lacking merit and aimed at delaying the substantive trial. The prosecution argued that the offences contained in the charge sheet were punishable under the Penal Code and were therefore properly before the FCT High Court.
Delivering her ruling, Justice Maryanne Anenih agreed with the prosecution’s position. The judge held that the court possesses the necessary jurisdiction to hear and determine the case and ruled that the proceedings do not constitute an abuse of court process.
Consequently, the court dismissed Bello’s application for lacking merit, clearing the way for the continuation of the trial.
Following the ruling, the prosecution resumed its case and presented its 16th witness, Baba Isah Usman Baffa, as efforts continue to establish the allegations against the defendants. The witness is expected to provide further evidence relating to the financial transactions and issues raised in the charges.
The decision represents a significant development in one of Nigeria’s most closely watched corruption cases. By affirming its jurisdiction, the court has removed a major legal hurdle that could have stalled proceedings and signaled its readiness to focus on the substantive issues surrounding the alleged fraud.
Legal analysts note that jurisdictional challenges are common in high-profile criminal cases, often serving as preliminary objections that must be resolved before a court can proceed to hear evidence. With the application now dismissed, attention is expected to shift fully to witness testimonies, documentary evidence, and the prosecution’s efforts to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
Justice Anenih subsequently adjourned the matter for continuation of trial proceedings, as the court moves closer to examining the merits of the allegations against the former governor and his co-defendants.
The ruling marks another chapter in the EFCC’s prosecution of high-profile public officials and reinforces the judiciary’s role in determining accountability in cases involving alleged large-scale financial crimes. While the allegations remain unproven until a final judgment is delivered, the court’s decision ensures that the trial will proceed without interruption.
