The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court on Friday fixed May 8 and 9 to rule on the admissibility of a judgment of the FCT High Court sought to be tendered by former Governor Yahaya Bello in defence of his case in the alleged money laundering trial.

Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the matter on Friday after the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)’s lawyer, Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), opposed the move by Mr Bello’s counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN), to tender the document in evidence before cross-examining the next witness.

The document, a judgment in suit number FCT/HC/CV/2574/2023 between Ali Bello and Incorporated Trustees of American International School Abuja, had decided on issues about the school fees payment or refund in the institution.

However, shortly after Mr Pinheiro concluded his evidence-in-chief with the third prosecution witness (PW-3), Nicholas Ohehomon, the American International School Abuja (AISA)’s auditor, Mr Daudu sought to tender the judgment before proceeding on cross-examination.

The senior lawyer also sought to tender the receipts of the recertification of the said document.

But Mr Pinherio, who had earlier examined the witness, objected, saying the prosecution had not yet closed its case.

He argued that the defendant could not tender documents when the prosecution was still proving its case, citing section 232 of the Evidence Act.

Reacting, Mr Daudu disagreed with the anti-graft agency’s lawyer, saying, “My lord, the admissibility of documents in criminal or civil cases is governed strictly and exclusively by the principles of relevance to the proceedings at hand.

“Once it is adjudged, we submit that the document is relevant, it becomes automatically admissible. That is what is contained in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Evidence Act, 2011.”

The defence lawyer said the question for the court was whether the document was relevant and admissible in line with section 4.

Mr Daudu argued that the judgment he sought to tender had AISA as a party and that, as far as the defendant was concerned, the witness (PW-3) was the sole witness of AISA in the matter.

He added, “Because he (Mr Pinheiro) is not comfortable with the document does not stop its admissibility.”

Mr Daudu said that though neither Mr Pinheiro nor himself would be the final arbiter on the issue, he urged the court to discountenance the submission of the EFCC lawyer.

Mr Pinheiro, in his response, prayed the court to reject the document, arguing that the defence counsel had not demonstrated that the document came within the ambit of Section 232 of the Evidence Act.

Justice Nwite, consequently, adjourned the matter until May 8 and 9 to rule on the admissibility and to continue the trial.

Earlier, when the trial resumed on Friday, Mr Pinheiro, while leading the witness in evidence, asked the AISA auditor to identify Exhibit 13P1.

The witness identified the exhibit as a telex from the bank sent to the AISA via email by Ali Bello.

The witness was also told to identify Exhibits 13P2 to 13P4, and he confirmed that they were transfers made by Forza Oil and Gas in favour of the respective children of the former Kogi governor.

Mr Ohehomon identified Exhibit 13P5, a telex by Whales Oil and Gas, to AISA and others.

Mr Pinherio asked the witness to tell the court in whose names four of the payment receipts were issued, and the PW-3 said they were issued in the names of the four children of the former governor.

(NAN)