The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has made a significant decision in the case involving the former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello. The commission has formally withdrawn its appeal against a Kogi high court order that prevented it from arresting Bello.
In a notice filed on April 22 by the EFCC’s counsel, J.S Okutepa, SAN, it was stated that the withdrawal was due to subsequent events that made the appeal unnecessary. Okutepa clarified, “The appellant herein intends to and do hereby wholly withdraw her appeal against the respondent in the above mentioned appeal.
“This notice of withdrawal is predicated on the fact that; on April 17, 2024, the application filed by the appellant herein was overtaken by the decision of the same high court of Kogi state,” Okutepa stated.
He further clarified, “The orders made ex parte by Jamil on February 9, 2024, in the said suit which is the subject of this appeal, was made to last pending the hearing and determination of the originating motion on notice which was finally determined by Jamil J. on April 17, 2024.
“Furthermore, the notice of appeal was filed out of time and we, therefore, pray that the appeal be struck out for being filed out of time and incompetent.”
The legal dispute began when Bello initiated a fundamental rights enforcement suit on February 8, citing “incessant harassment” by the EFCC. The Kogi high court granted an interim injunction on February 9, restraining the EFCC from further actions against Bello.
Despite the EFCC’s subsequent appeal against the interim injunction, the Kogi high court reaffirmed the injunction on April 17, instructing the EFCC to file charges against Bello if necessary.
This development occurred after EFCC operatives attempted to arrest Bello at his Abuja residence, following the commission’s obtaining of a warrant of arrest against him from the Abuja federal high court.
The EFCC had planned to arraign Bello on charges including money laundering and misappropriation of funds amounting to N80.2 billion.
However, Bello’s absence during the scheduled arraignment on April 18, along with jurisdictional and procedural arguments, complicated the legal proceedings.