A renowned legal activist and constitutional lawyer, Wilfred Molokun has cautioned the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to halt the media trial of immediate past governor of Kogi state, Alhaji Yahaya Bello, in a bid to arraign him in court.
The activist posited that it would be absurd for the EFCC charged with responsibility of enforcing all economic and financial crimes laws to undermine the rule of law in an effort to prosecute a former governor.
Molokun gave the warning in Abuja, while reacting on the judgement of the Kogi State High Court delivered on April 17, 2024 by Justice Isa Jamil Abdullahi, who granted an order restraining the EFCC “from continuing to harass, threaten to arrest or detain” Bello based on the criminal charges now pending before the Federal High Court Abuja.
Molokun insisted the EFCC should allow the Federal High Court, now seized of the matter to rule on Bello’s application seeking to vacate the warrant of arrest earlier made against him by the court.
The activist argued that, essentially, the court has been adequately addressed by both parties on the issues, stressing that the sanctity of rule of law must supreme and be obeyed at all times by citizens including corporate bodies like EFCC.
Recall that Justice Emeka Nwite of a Federal High Court Abuja, had fixed May 10, for ruling on Yahaya Bello’s application seeking to vacate the arrest warrant made against him on April 17, 2024.
Bello’s application was argued on April 23, 2024, by Adeola Adedipe, SAN, while Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, who represented the EFCC vehemently opposed it.
In his argument, Adedipe stressed the need for the court on its own to set aside the arrest warrant, which was made before the charge was filed, without any request by the parties involved.
He argued that contrary to Pinheiro’s submission that the ex-governor must be in court first before any application could be entertained being a criminal case, the EFCC had made an application on April 18, after the warrant arrest was issued on April 17, and that the court granted it.
According to Adedipe, the complainant made an application for substituted service on 18th day of April after the arrest warrant had been issued on April 17, and my noble lord granted it.
“The court must satisfy itself that the defendant (Bello) will not be prejudiced in fairness if the warrant of arrest continues to hang on his neck, having been made before service of the charge contrary to Section 394 of ACJA” Adedipe submitted.
