An Economic and Financial Crimes Commission witness, Nicholas Ojehomon, told an Abuja High Court that former Kogi governor. Yahaya Bello did not sign the prepaid school fees agreement.
Ojehomon, is an internal auditor with the American International School, Abuja,
The EFCC charged Bello, Umar Oricha and Abdulsalam Hudu with criminal breach of trust.
Bello and his co-defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge.
When cross-examined by the Counsel to Bello and Oricha, Joseph Daudu, SAN, the witness Bello was not a signatory to the Agreement for Prepaid School Fees.
He was asked to read out part of the judgment markedFCT/HE/CV/ 2574/2025, which indicated that the school erred by refunding the school fees in contention, to the EFCC.
He read out part of the Certified True Copy of the judgment, filed by Ali Bello against the AISA.
He read:”it hereby declared that the Defendant cannot lawfully and unilaterally grant the ‘request for refund’ and pay over to a third party, the EFCC or anyone howsoever described, the sum of 760,910 dollars or any other sum paid pursuant to the ‘Agreement for Prepaid School Fees except in accordance with the said agreement or upon an order of court.
After the cross-examination of the witness, two motions were taken by the prosecution and the 1st and 2nd defendants counsel.
The prosecution counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN told the court that the motion is dated Oct 25, 2025.
” Essentially, it seeks to prevent a stay or suspended hearing of the 1st defendant’s motion.
He cited sections 11 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, (ACJA) 2015, for speedy trial 221(ACJA) for extinguishing of objection during trial.
“Section 396 (1) and (2) ACJA when a defendant has taken a plea, he has submitted to the trial.
” No criminal trial shall be interrupted, interlocutory application do not have a place in criminal trial.
Opposing, Daudu said what the prosecution is saying is that the defendants should be shut out from contesting the jurisdiction of the case.
He said the cases the prosecution’s interpretation of the sections is misconceived.
” All his authorities came from section 396 which stated also that the defendant can raise objection before judgment provided the objection can be considered alongside the judgment.
Considering the validity of a charge, he said it is where an objection is taken as in imperfect charge.
He raised the issue of total abuse of the court process ” The court does not belong to the EFCC that they should insist hate we must go on.
“Section 66(b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended invested the court inherent power to exercise its discretion.
” The prosecution contended that by taking plea, the defendants have submitted to the jurisdiction, there is no law stating such submission to jurisdiction does not bar the defendants from challenging jurisdiction. It can be raised at any time before judgment” he said.
Daudu also argued it motion on abuse of court processes.
He told the court that he has three exhibits attached showing that the prosecution has the same processes in three different courts.
” The FCT high court lacks jurisdiction and the proceedings should be terminated.
The prosecution counsel, Pinheiro , however replied that the charges are different.
Trial judge, Justice Maryanne Anenih then adjourned until Friday for continuation.
