On October 30, 2024, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) requested that Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Maitama, Abuja, continue with the trial of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello in his absence. The EFCC argued that Bello’s failure to appear for arraignment should not hinder the progress of his trial.
Lead counsel for the EFCC, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, emphasized the importance of proceeding with the case despite Bello’s absence. She urged the court to enter a plea of “not guilty” on behalf of the former governor, who faces 19 charges related to money laundering amounting to N80.2 billion.
The court has summoned Bello for arraignment six times without his appearance. Pinheiro asserted that his refusal to engage with the court was a deliberate act meant to disrupt the judicial process.
She further stated that allowing the trial to be stalled by a defendant’s absence would undermine the rule of law. “A court can never demonstrate helplessness,” she argued, adding that such a situation would suggest anarchy within the system.
Pinheiro insisted that the integrity of the judicial process must be maintained, regardless of a defendant’s actions. She highlighted that a criminal trial should not be held hostage by a defendant’s refusal to participate.
Justice, she noted, is a three-way street that involves the rights of the defendant, the prosecution’s efforts to present their case, and the interests of society as a whole. The court’s role is crucial in ensuring that justice is served.
Read also: The Education Minister removed the 18-year age limit for university
Earlier in her arguments, Pinheiro pointed out that under Section 276 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), a defendant’s physical presence in court is not strictly necessary for arraignment.
She emphasized that the right to plead guilty or not guilty can be waived by the defendant, which means Bello’s absence should not obstruct the proceedings.
Pinheiro’s primary request was to formally enter a plea of not guilty for Bello, allowing the trial to move forward without further delays.
Her statements underscored the need for the court to act decisively, reinforcing the principle that justice should not be impeded by an individual’s refusal to comply with legal processes.
In conclusion, the EFCC’s position is clear: the trial of Yahaya Bello should continue, and the absence of the defendant should not prevent the court from fulfilling its duty to uphold the law.
The case highlights the ongoing tension between a defendant’s rights and the necessity of maintaining an effective judicial process.
