The trial of former Attorney General of the Federation Abubakar Malami took a new turn on Friday when a Federal High Court in Abuja decided that his previous bail was revoked due to the reassignment of the case.
The court ruled that all prior proceedings, including the bail granted by Justice Emeka Nwite, were considered terminated because the action had started anew before it. As a result, a new bail application was necessary.
The former AGF was charged with 16 counts by the EFCC for allegedly engaging in money laundering and illegally acquiring assets worth over N8.7 billion.
The prosecution, led by J.S. Okutepa, made an appearance at the reopened hearing and requested that the defendants’ pleas be taken on the amended 16-count.
To the amended allegations, Malami, his wife Asabe, and son Abdulaziz all entered not guilty pleas.
The prosecution asked the court to set a trial date after the plea.
However, noting that the Federal High Court is a single court and that the defendants had previously been accepted to bail, the defense, led by J.B. Daudu (SAN), sought the court to uphold the previous bail restrictions set by Justice Nwite.
In response, the prosecution admitted that bail had already been issued but maintained that the new court had the authority to either adopt the old terms or impose new ones.
He went on to say that although he would not pursue the matter further, the court ought to set requirements that would guarantee the defendants’ presence at the trial.
Remember that the previous bail requirements required each surety to own property in Maitama or Asokoro and that the bail amount be N500 million apiece. Additionally, the defendants had to file two foreign passports with the court, and the Assistant Chief Registrar had to confirm the sureties’ domicile.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, the sitting judge, ruled that prior proceedings are legally terminated when a matter starts over as a result of reassignment.
Despite acknowledging that the court had not received a formal bail application, the defense attempted to make an oral request.
The court declined, ordering the defense to submit a formal bail application and serve the prosecution with it. A brief postponement date would then be set for the hearing.
The defense also told the court that scheduling a trial date may be challenging because the first and second defendants were currently in the Department of State Services’ custody and could not be reached.
The prosecution had an obligation to guarantee the defendants’ availability, the court retorted, and it could not guess on any party’s stance.
However, the prosecution insisted that it could not force the DSS to deliver the defendants because they were not under its custody.
In order to hear the bail motion and start the trial, Justice Abdulmalik then postponed the case to March 6.
She directed that Malami’s wife be placed on remand at the Suleja Correctional Center and that he and his son be placed on remand at the Kuje Correctional Center.
