Eric Patrick
Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court Abuja has adjourned the hearing of the suit instituted against the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to June 26, 27, July 4 and 5 for ruling on the request by the prosecution to cross-examine the 3rd witness and for continuation of trial.
Justice Nwite adjourned the hearing after listening to addresses by the prosecution and defence counsels on the prosecution’s move to initially cross-examine the witness, a position that was rejected by the defendant’s Lawyer, Joseph Daudu, SAN.
This was contained in a statement by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, and shared on its Facebook page on Friday.
The former governor is being prosecuted by the EFCC on 19-count charges, bordering on criminal breach of trust and money laundering to the tune of N80.2 billion.
According to the statement, the charges are in violation of Section 18(a) and are punishable under Section 15(3) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended).
The request for the re-examination followed the need to clarify issues raised during the cross-examination of the witness on Exhibit 19, which was introduced by the witness during the cross-examination in relation to the school fees of the defendant’s children in AISA.
Prosecution counsel, Olukayode Eniola, SAN, said, “I am not examining the witness afresh, but re-examining him based on areas deliberately left untouched by the defence.
“This document came from the witness, but was tampered with by the defence.
READ ALSO: No Evidence Yahaya Bello Used Kogi Funds for Kids Tuition — Witness
“I also have the right to draw his attention to relevant portions. What we seek to do is to re-examine this witness on matters that arose for the first time during cross-examination, specifically in relation to Exhibit 19.”
Citing Section 32 of the Constitution, the prosecution counsel argued that a fair hearing demanded that the prosecution be allowed equal opportunity to address issues raised during cross-examination.
The prosecution counsel further submitted that the move was in accordance with Section 215(3) of the Evidence Act.
He also argued that the Supreme Court in Ameobi vs. Ameobi held that refusal to allow re-examination of such exhibits amounted to a miscarriage of justice.
He said, “We urge the court not to shut out the prosecution. Doing so would result in a miscarriage of justice, especially since the defence introduced the document during the prosecution’s case.”