There was a drama at the Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday when the witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mshellia Bata, openly refuted the allegations by the agency that he (witness) was thoroughly harassed and intimidated by security aides of former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, on account of his testimony in court. 
 
The witness, a Compliance Officer with Zenith Bank, told Justice Emeka Nwite that nothing of such happened to him before, during and after the proceedings of June 26 contrary to the allegations by the agency.  

EFCC’s lawyer, Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), had before the proceedings of June 27, raised an alarm that the EFCC witness was subjected to intimidation and harassment by agents of the former governor after giving evidence on June 26.
 
But Bello’s lawyer, J. B Daudu (SAN), expressed surprise with the allegations on the ground that such ugly action had never happened since the trial of his client began in the Federal High Court and the High Court of the FCT, both in Abuja.  
 
He promised to look into the allegations and report back to the court on the next adjourned date.Justice Nwite thereafter urged the defendant’s counsel to thoroughly investigate the matter.
 
However, drama erupted when the prosecution witness sought permission of the court to clear air on the allegations.  He said that he felt the need to make the clarification on the allegation raised by Pinheiro at the beginning of the day’s proceedings.  
 
“My lord, I wish to clarify the matter raised earlier before the commencement of proceedings. I was not harassed by any of the security details attached to the defendant. 
 
“I was not harassed at all, and I felt the need to clarify this, my lord,” he stated; adding that he had not lodged such reports or complaints with anybody. 
 
As the drama was unfolding, Daudu suddenly called the attention of the judge to a story on the EFCC’s website, alleging that the commission’s witness was harassed and intimidated.  He also said that the EFCC misrepresented the facts of the previous day’s court proceedings.  
 
Responding, Pinheiro said he would call the attention of the EFCC to the misinformation. 
 
The defendant’s counsel commended the witness for his honesty and integrity in coming forward to clarify the situation in the open court.  The witness, during cross-examination by Daudu, confirmed that the former governor was neither a signatory to nor connected with any of the accounts presented as evidence.
 
He admitted that going through Exhibit 22A (the bank account of Kogi Government House Administration) from pages 24 to 413, Bello was not also listed on any of the documents as a beneficiary of any of the transactions.
 
“I am here to speak on the documents before me. From the document, His Excellency, Alhaji Yahaya Adoza Bello’s name did not feature in any description or as beneficiary in any transaction in the documents before me,” he said.

The compliance officer had earlier mentioned the signatories on the accounts managed for the Kogi State Government House Administration and also confirmed letters that introduced those who replaced some key officials along the line.
 
The prosecution counsel, Pinheiro, objected; saying that the defendant’s counsel should restrict his question to the document and not ask the witness who benefitted. 
 
“The witness is not an expert of law,” he argued.

“But the witness, as an expert, knows what to say,” Justice Nwite responded.
 
The witness had earlier explained that he supervises a cluster of 13 branches within Abuja and other places like Gwagwalada, University of Abuja, Ahmadu Bello Way, Baze University, Garki, and Garki Ultra Modern Market, among others.  He also admitted that his clusters did not extend beyond the FCT. 
 
The witness was earlier told to identify the signatories to the accounts and their designations, considering the documents tendered as evidence.  He mentioned the names, ranging from the Permanent Secretary to the Chief Accountant and Accountant. 
 
After the testimony for the day, Daudu informed the court about the application for the release of the defendant’s travel documents to enable him travel to the United Kingdom for medical care. 
 
But the prosecution said they had filed a counter-affidavit to the application, arguing that the application was technically incompetent. Pinheiro said the same application was filed at the FCT High Court, adding that it was an abuse of court process.
 
Daudu said the prosecution was the one guilty of abuse of court process. 

 “We were served with the counter affidavit yesterday and we, overnight, filed a further affidavit to the complainant’s counter affidavit with two exhibits as well.
 
“My lord, the substance of the application is for the release of his international passport in line with the conditions for the bail that, if he needs, he has to apply to court.
 
“He has medical needs to attend to during the period of the vacation. After eight years of not traveling, he needs to attend to certain aspects of his health,” Daudu said.
 
The court adjourned to July 3 and 4 for continuation of trial and July 21 for ruling on the application to travel.