School Fees Evidence Sparks EFCC Demand for Witness Re-examination in Yahaya Bello’ Case

Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned proceedings in the trial of former Kogi State governor, Yahaya Adoza Bello, to June 26 and 27, and July 3 and 4, 2025. The adjournment is to allow the court to rule on an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seeking to re-examine its third witness, Nicholas Ojehomon, over questions arising from the school fees payment of the defendant’s children at the American International School, Abuja (AISA).

Bello is standing trial on a 19-count charge of criminal breach of trust and money laundering totaling N80.2 billion. The charges, according to the EFCC, contravene Section 18(a) and are punishable under Section 15(3) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended).

The EFCC’s re-examination request stems from issues raised during the defence’s cross-examination of Ojehomon, particularly regarding Exhibit 19—a document concerning the school fees—introduced during cross-examination.

Prosecution counsel, Olukayode Eniola, SAN, contended that the exhibit had been selectively presented and allegedly tampered with by the defence, necessitating clarification through re-examination.

“I am not examining the witness afresh, but re-examining him based on areas deliberately left untouched by the defence,” Eniola argued. “This document came from the witness, but was tampered with by the defence. They spent over two hours cross-examining him on it. I also have the right to draw his attention to relevant portions.”

Citing Section 32 of the Constitution, the EFCC lawyer emphasized the need for fair hearing and equal opportunity to address issues arising unexpectedly during cross-examination. He further relied on Section 215(3) of the Evidence Act and cited several legal precedents including Ameobi vs. Ameobi, Haruna vs. Modibbo (2004), Aziz vs. Lagos State (2020), Adeniji vs. Lagos State (2020), and Gado vs. Iliyasu (2014) to support the prosecution’s right to re-examine the witness.

Defence counsel, J.B. Daudu, SAN, objected to the motion, but Justice Nwite reserved ruling and adjourned the matter to the specified dates for a decision on the application and continuation of trial.