Bello
By Amah
Kindly share:
Yahaya Bello, the immediate former Kogi State Governor, is to temporarily forfeit 14 high-value properties to the Federal Government.
This follows an order of the Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos, which reinstated an earlier interim order of forfeiture imposed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, which was set aside by the Federal High Court.
A three-member panel of the Appeal Court, led by Justice Yargata Nimpar, in a judgment delivered via virtual proceedings on Wednesday, ruled the Federal High Court out of order in dismissing the case on the basis of Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, which provides immunity for sitting governors.
The appellate court judges, including Justices Danlami Senchi and Paul Bassi concurring, ruled that though immunity may shield individuals from legal action, it does not extend to suspected illegally acquired assets.
Consequently, the EFCC’s interim preservation order was reinstated while it was directed to commence a substantive hearing to determine whether the assets should be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
The EFCC had challenged the decision of Justice Nicholas Oweibo of the Federal High Court, who had earlier dismissed the commission’s case with regard to premium properties scattered across Abuja, Lagos, and Dubai, which the commission had initially been seized under an interim order via an ex parte application.
The commission accused Bello of acquiring the assets with proceeds of corruption.
However, Bello contested the seizure, contending that he acquired the properties before he became governor, adding that state funds were not involved in their acquisition, hence Justice Oweibo vacated the order.
Bello’s counsels based their argument on on 308 as grounds for immunity and further argued that the Federal High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction over properties outside Lagos. They also challenged the applicability of the Proceeds of Crime Act, 2022, claiming that the law should not be applied retroactively.
Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, the EFCC counsel, countered the argument and insisted that the anti-graft agency acted within its statutory powers and that the properties were subject to investigation regardless of the governor’s immunity status.
He also argued that there was no valid court order barring the EFCC from investigating or preserving such assets.
In it’s ruling, the appeal court, upheld the arguments of the EFCC, and held that the trial court’s reliance on the immunity clause was misplaced.
“The immunity granted to a sitting governor does not preclude the court from determining the status of property reasonably suspected to be the proceeds of crime,” Justice Nimpar ruled.
All preliminary objections raised by Bello’s legal team were also dismissed as the court ruled that the case should not have been struck out.
