The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned the money laundering trial involving former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, until June 26, 27, and July 4 and 5, to rule on a legal disagreement over the prosecution’s attempt to cross-examine its own witness.
Justice Emeka Nwite postponed the proceedings after heated exchanges between legal teams representing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the former governor.
During Friday’s hearing, the defense counsel, Chief Joseph Daudu, SAN, questioned EFCC witness Nicholas Ojehomon—an internal auditor at the American International School, Abuja—on whether he had testified in other courts regarding tuition payments linked to the Bello family.
Ojehomon confirmed he had but couldn’t recall the specific courts, noting that his testimony had never been damaging to Yahaya Bello in those cases or the current one.
After Daudu concluded his cross-examination, EFCC counsel Olukayode Enitan, SAN, sought to question the witness further based on Exhibit 19, claiming it was a cross-examination and not a re-examination.
The defense strongly objected, arguing that under the Evidence Act, the prosecution cannot cross-examine its own witness unless the court first declares the witness hostile.
“You must declare your witness hostile before attempting to cross-examine him,” Daudu insisted.
Enitan countered, saying he had the right to direct the court’s attention to certain aspects of the exhibit under the principle of fair hearing enshrined in Section 36 of the Constitution.
The judge, however, questioned whether such a position had any legal backing, emphasizing that the correct sequence is evidence-in-chief, cross-examination by the defense, and re-examination by the prosecution.
Justice Nwite advised that if the prosecution wished to pursue such a line of questioning, both parties would need to formally address the court on the matter.
He allowed Enitan to proceed with a re-examination—but warned that it should not resemble cross-examination.
When Enitan’s re-examination began resembling a cross-examination, Daudu objected, prompting the judge to insist that the matter be properly addressed in court before any ruling could be made.
Daudu maintained that the prosecution’s method was unfamiliar to Nigerian law, stating, “Referring a witness to a document during re-examination without linking it to prior testimony or clarifying ambiguity is a procedure not recognized under the Evidence Act.”
Enitan disagreed, citing a Supreme Court decision that allowed re-examination of evidence previously tendered.
He argued that the defense could not introduce documents during cross-examination and then prevent the prosecution from responding to them, as doing so would be unfair.
Justice Nwite eventually postponed the hearing, setting June 26, 27, and July 4 and 5 for further proceedings, including a decision on the disputed cross-examination.
Previously, the third prosecution witness testified that no school fees were ever paid to the American International School of Abuja from the Kogi State Government or any of its local governments.
He also quoted an earlier FCT High Court judgment that stated there was no order mandating the return of such fees to the EFCC, nor was there any ruling labeling the payments as proceeds of money laundering.