Justice Omotosho issued the threat following a complaint by Bello’s counsel, Abubakar Aliyu, SAN, accusing the EFCC of publishing untrue accounts of what transpired in court on the last adjourned date on its website against his client.

The News Agency of Nigeria, NAN, reports that the anti-graft agency filed the charges in 2022, accusing Bello and Dauda Sulaiman of fraud involving alleged diversion of funds from the Kogi State Government coffers.

While Bello is the 1st defendant, Sulaiman is the 2nd defendant in the 10-count charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/550/2022.

Aliyu had told the court that he had a complaint to make on his client’s behalf.

He said: “the prosecutor is subjecting my client (Bello) to mob justice by making publications” that were allegedly untrue.

The lawyer alleged that the publication, which was on EFCC’s website, was distributed to other social media.

“They (EFCC) said the 1st defendant made a payment of the house at Ikogosi Close in Maitama District and after he discovered that the house was under investigation by EFCC, he now returned the documents back,” Aliyu said.

He said his client told him that he did not buy the property contrary to the allegation.

The lawyer, who gave a copy of the printout to the court, also said that a copy had already been served on the commission’s counsel.

“What is your reaction counsel,” Justice Omotosho asked EFCC’s lawyer, Abbas Muhammed.

Responding after he went through the copy, Muhammed said he could not verify the authenticity at the moment.

“I have seen the publication. At this point my lord, I cannot verify. I will have to verify with the media team,” he said.

The judge then gave him the go-ahead to verify and report back to the court in the next adjourned date.

“I want to say this, on the reportage of this proceedings. I won’t take it if it continues this way.

“I am going to take all your files and send back to the CJ for reassignment.

“It is not only against the defendant but against the court,” the judge said.

READ ALSO: Why ‘Osupa’ sought arrest, arraignment of ‘Portable’ -Police

Justice Omotosho said writing fictitious stories about court proceedings might make the public lose confidence in the court.

He said such action bordered on the integrity of the court.

“Now that this report is online, and if I now hold otherwise, how will the society sees it?

“You create wrong impression in the society.

“I can’t be put in the public for analysis on what happens in court.

“You have to go and report back. This is annoying,” the judge said.

Justice Omotosho, who acknowledged the presence of accredited journalists in court, emphasised on the need for accurate reportage of what transpired in court.

He likened it to the case of Rivers matter where some social media users attacked the court for its judgment which ruled in favour of Martins Amaewhule-led lawmakers after Gov. Siminalayi Fubara voluntarily withdrew his counter affidavit in the suit.

“I have had so much from social media.

“The day the Rivers matter was heard and the counsel applied to withdraw their application, I stood the matter down for one hour and 30 minutes to give the counsel the opportunity to consult, before he finally withdrew their counter affidavit,” he said.

Justice Omotosho said it was however a different arguments on social media as some were saying that the judge did not consider the application filed by Fubara in arriving at the decision.

“Let us stop this because it affects the integrity of the system,” he said.

Earlier, the EFCC lawyer, Muhammed, informed the court that the matter was slated for continuation of trial and that their 11th witness was in court.

Segun Adeleke, the 11th prosecution witness (PW-11) and the General Manager of EFAB Properties Ltd, was led in evidence by Muhammed.

“My schedule include recruitment, discipline, dismissal and more importantly, I head the team that concludes purchases of houses in the office,” he said.

Adeleke, who said he had been in the company for 28 years, said Chief Fabian Nwora is their chairman.

When the lawyer asked him if he knew a man called, Shehu Bello, the witness responded in affirmative.

The PW-11 said in 2020, Chief Nwora, his boss, sent for him.

He said when he got to his chairman’s office, he met Shehu Bello.

“Before then, they had discussed a property at Maitama, No 1, Ikogosi Spring Close, that Shehu Bello will come and make the payment of N500 million  for the property,” he said.

The witness said Shehu Bello paid the dollars equivalent of N500 million and that he made the enquiry from a bureau de change operator to confirm.

When Muhammed asked Adeleke how the money was paid, he said: “The money was received in cash.”

He said the house located at Ikogosi, Maitama in Abuja was given “No. 1,” on the close because it was the first building on the close and the houses there were not numbered.

When asked if he had any other contact with Shehu Bello, the witness said: “Concerning our personal contact, it starts with the making of the payment. Every other contacts continue with my chairman.”

During cross examination, Aliyu, who represented Ali Bello, asked the witness if his client was Shehu Bello and he said: “No My lord.”

Also, Olusegun Jolaawo, SAN, who appeared for Sulaiman, the 2nd defendant, asked if his client was Shehu Bello and the PW-11 equally responded in the negative.

Justice Omotosho after discharging the witness from the witness box, adjourned the matter until May 7 and May 9 for continuation of trial.

The post Alleged false report: Judge threatens to withdraw from EFCC’s case against Ali Bello appeared first on Frontpageng.

The suit is seeking to stop the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions from going ahead with the disciplinary proceedings over alleged misconduct by Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Justice Egwuatu announced his withdrawal from the case over allegations of bias levelled against the court by Akpabio, who is the 3rd defendant in the matter.

When the matter was called on Tuesday, the judge, after taking the appearance of lawyers for the parties in the suit, announced his decision to withdraw from the case.

He cited the allegation as the major reason for his decision.

It was gathered that the senate president had expressed lack of confidence in the ability of the court to do justice on the matter, hence the reason for the development.

The judge subsequently ordered that the case file be remitted back to the Chief Judge, Justice John Tsoho, for reassignment

Justice Egwuatu had, on March 19, set aside its order of March 4, declaring the suspension of Sen. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan by the Senate as null and void.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu, in a ruling, vacated the suit after listening to the arguments of counsel for the plaintiff and lawyers to the defendants in the suit.

Though the court had earlier fixed today for the hearing of the matter, March 19 was however, rescheduled to take the motion on notice filed by the Senate (2nd defendant) to seek for the order vacating the March 4 order which declared any action taken by the defendants during the pendency of the suit as null, void and of no effect whatsoever.

The judge had granted Natasha’s five reliefs on March 4, including Order Number Four which declared any action taken by the defendants during the pendency of the suit as null, void and of no effect whatsoever.

The judge granted the five prayers after Sanusi Musa, SAN, who appeared for Natasha, moved the ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025.

Natasha, who represents Kogi Central Senatorial District, had, in the motion ex-parte, sued clerk of the National Assembly (NASS) and the Senate as 1st and 2nd defendants.

She also named the President of the Senate, Federal Republic of Nigeria, and Sen. Neda Imasuem, who is the Chairman, Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Code of Conduct as 3rd and 4th defendants respectively.

READ ALSO: Hajj 2025: FG pledges enhanced medical support

The senator had sought an order of interim injunction restraining the Senate’s committee headed by Imasuem from proceeding with the purported investigation against her for alleged misconduct sequel to the events that occurred at the plenary on Feb. 20, pursuant to the referral by the Senate on Feb. 25, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction, among others.

However, the Senate, in a motion on notice filed on March 17 by its lawyer, Chikaosolu Ojukwu, SAN, had sought an order setting aside Order Number Four in the enrolled ex-parte order made by Justice Egwuatu against the defendants in Natasha’s suit.

The Senate, through Ojukwu, urged the judge to vacate the order in the interest of fair hearing.

“By Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution, the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is one of the Houses of the National Assembly established to make laws for the peace, order and good governance of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“That the said Order No. 4 of 4th March, 2025 as granted, effectively restrains the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria from conducting any of its legislative duties in accordance with its constitutional functions.”

Ojukwu said enforcing the said order, as granted, would result in a constitutional crisis and anarchy, as the entire legislative duties of the Senate would be made to grind to a halt.

“The order offends the doctrine of separation of powers as enshrined in Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“This honourable court lacks the jurisdiction to restrain parliament from conducting its constitutional duties,” he said.

He therefore urged the court to hold that the entire proceedings of March 4 upon which that breach occurred was in nullity.

Lawyer to the clerk, Charles Yoila; Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, who appeared for Akpabio and Umeh Kalu, SAN, who represented Imasuem, aligned themselves with Ojukwu’s argument.

But counsel, who appeared for Natasha, Michael Numa, SAN, disagreed with their submissions.

He described their argument as the conspiracy of the defence.

The lawyer urged the court to dismiss the defence application and exercise its disciplinary powers on them for alleged contempt of the valid court order.

He argued that the defendants had, with audacity, disobeyed the order of the court.

While responding to the argument of Ojukwu, Numa submitted that “parties are bound by the prayers on the motion paper.”

He urged the court to discountenance the application.

The lawyer argued that the court must consider the entire orders in their ex-parte motion and not in piecemeal.

He said their argument was immaterial.

According to him, the Senate (2nd defendant) did not mention the propriety of Orders One, Two, Three and Five made by this honourable court.

“The fact that Order Four was made is only an ancillary order to give effect to the motion that until the matter is dispensed with,” he said.

Numa described the application by the defence as an affront on the court, that the judge should set aside the orders they had not challenged.

He said the defendants had not even addressed the order directing them to show cause within 72 hours upon the service of the order.

“This is an invitation to anarchy my lord,” he said, citing previous cases to back his argument.

“Whatever reservation they have, their only duty is to come to court. The order was that the respondents to come and show course.

“Their application is self-defeating,” he argued.

In her contempt charge, the embattled lawmaker argued that her suspension constituted wilful disobedience to the subsisting court order issued on March 4.

She stated that an enrolled order of the interim injunction issued by Justice Egwuatu was duly served on the defendants on March 5.

According to Form 48, the defendants/contemnors “deliberately and contumaciously disregarded” the binding directive of the court and “proceeded with acts in flagrant defiance of the authority of the court.”

Source: NAN

The post Judge withdraws from Natasha’s suit against Akpabio, others appeared first on Frontpageng.