The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, on Wednesday, urged Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja to enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of the immediate past governor of Kogi State, even in his absence.
At the resumed hearing, EFCC Counsel, Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), told Justice Emeka Nwite that he has two applications to present to the court, the first he said was to formally apply for a plea for Bello and the second he noted was to present his two witnesses who are already in court.
He said, “My first application is to formally enter a plea of not guilty to the defendant, even in his absence. The second point is that, notwithstanding his physical absence, it is in full compliance with Section 276 of ACJA.
“Flowing from that entry my lord, it is a humble request that we call the first witness.”
While submitting his application, to enter a plea of not guilty for the defendant, Pinheiro said, “The right to plead guilty or not guilty is a right that can be waived by the defendant.
“My lord should hold that the defendant has waived that right.
“What prejudice will the defendant suffer if my lord enters a plea of guilty or not guilty in his absence? Even if he was in court and pleaded not guilty, the situation would still be the same. The entry of a plea of not guilty by your lordship is an invitation to the prosecution to come and prove the veracity of the allegations”.
Bello’s counsel, Michael Adoyi, however, opposed Pinheiro’s submission because the Prosecution’s application was made contrary to a subsisting order of the judge.
“Our first point of response to the application made by the learned senior counsel to the complainant is that the application is made contrary to the subsisting order of this honourable court, even made this morning – that no application can be entertained by this court in the absence of the arraignment of the defendant.
“The prosecution has stated severally that the court cannot demonstrate helplessness. The court cannot demonstrate any helplessness in any proceeding and if at all helplessness exists in this proceeding, that helplessness is demonstrated by the prosecution,” he said.
Adoyi argued that the court, in a criminal trial, is immune and distinct from the prosecution.
Citing Supreme Court verdicts on similar matters, he said, “The application made by learned senior counsel for the complainant this morning is a dangerous invitation to this honourable court to aide the prosecution in the performance of its duty of presenting the defendant before the court for arraignment and subsequent trial.”
He argued that civil proceedings were different from the criminal proceeding.
The Defendant’s Counsel noted that the prosecution’s application could not be anchored on any of the provisions of the ACJA, 2015 that he had cited, as “those provisions do not excuse the need for the physical presence of the defendant.”
