A federal high court in Abuja has again adjourned the alleged money laundering case filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Yahaya Bello, former Kogi governor.

Emeke Nwite, presiding judge, adjourned the case following Bello’s absence in court.

After filing a 19-count charge, the EFCC has been seeking to arraign Bello since April, over allegations bordering on money laundering to the tune of N80 billion.

At the resumed court session on Wednesday, the former governor was represented by A.M. Adoyi.

Excusing the absence of his client, Adoyi said two appeals have been filed before the supreme court seeking to set aside the arrest warrant issued by the trial court on April 17, and to set aside the order of the court of appeal directing Bello to appear for his arraignment.

He said he would like to draw the court’s attention to the appeal by virtue of an affidavit of record filed on September 23.

“The appeal number is SC/CR/847/2024 and SC/CR/848/2024. That means the most appropriate thing to do is to await the decision of the supreme court in the aforesaid appeal before taking any step for arraignment so as not to render the appellant’s appeal null or to pull the rug from off the feet of my learned justices of the supreme court,” Adoyi said.

Responding, Kemi Pinheiro, EFCC counsel, submitted that the defence was taking the court for granted.

He said the prosecution lawyer has been pushed by his seniors to turn the court into a vaudeville.

“This court is not a vaudeville, a place of variety entertainment,” Pinheiro said.

“No party or person must turn the court into a place of entertainment. Courts must resist it.

“This court has adjourned on four different occasions for the defendant to present himself for arraignment.

“Rather than respect the sanctity of the constitution and this court, the defendant through his lawyers has deployed all manner of chicanery.

“On the last adjournment, they assured that the defendant would be presented in court today. That was why your lordship granted a long adjournment.

“An appeal the defendant filed is disputing the mode of service of the proof of evidence and the charge was dismissed by the court of appeal on August 28.

“The court of appeal said the mode of service was good and proper service. The appellant shall not take any further steps until he submits himself.

“Notwithstanding this order, the lawyers have now filed another application before your lordship in total disregard of the court of appeal’s judgment that they should not take any steps until the defendant takes his plea.