At a resumed sitting of the FCT High Court on Thursday, Justice Maryanne Anenih clarified that the international passport of former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello is not in the possession of her court but rather held by the Federal High Court. This revelation came during the ongoing money laundering trial initiated by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Bello and his co-defendants.
The judge stressed, “The court would have considered the application for the release of the defendant’s travel document if it were to be in its custody,” adding that even if the request was granted, “it would be of no effect since the passport was not in the custody of the court.”
According to okay.ng reports, Bello, alongside Umar Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu, was arraigned on November 27, 2024, facing charges of alleged property fraud amounting to N110 billion. The judge noted the court’s inability to consider Bello’s application for passport retrieval due to the document’s custody placement.
Justice Anenih described the application as misleading in its assumption that the passport was with the FCT High Court, explaining that bail terms would require Bello to surrender the passport or submit an affidavit if it was held by another court.
The bail conditions also instructed Bello to release his passport immediately after the Federal High Court, where he faces a separate charge, relinquished custody. The former governor himself affirmed in an affidavit, “the passport was with the deputy registrar of the Federal High Court and would present it as soon as it ‘is released to me by the Federal High Court.’”
The judge cautioningly remarked that “the international passport cannot be in two places at the same time; this court is not in a position to speculate if he has two passports,” emphasizing that this claim was not substantiated in court.
The trial was subsequently adjourned until October 8 to continue proceedings.
Bello’s legal team, led by Joseph Daudu, SAN, previously informed the court that the passport in question is indeed not in the FCT court’s custody, reinforcing the court’s findings. The EFCC has opposed the application through a counter affidavit.
