Subpoena Row Stalls Access Bank Witness Testimony in ₦110.4bn Kogi Fraud Trial

Proceedings in the high-profile ₦110.4 billion fraud trial of former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Adoza Bello, were stalled on Tuesday following a legal dispute over the examination of a subpoenaed prosecution witness at the Federal High Court, Abuja.

The trial, which is being heard before Justice Maryanne Anineh, involves Bello alongside Umar Shuaibu Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu, who are facing a 16-count charge bordering on criminal breach of trust and money laundering.

At the resumed hearing on February 10, 2026, lead prosecution counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, informed the court that proceedings were scheduled to continue with the testimony of Prosecution Witness Ten (PW10), Olomotane Egoro, a Compliance Officer with Access Bank, who appeared in court pursuant to a subpoena.

Pinheiro sought to tender the prosecution’s application for the issuance of the subpoena, which was admitted in evidence and marked Exhibit AE, without objection from defence counsel, P.B. Daudu, SAN, and Z.E. Abbas.

However, when the prosecution attempted to examine the witness, the defence raised a strong objection, arguing that the prosecution could not proceed on the basis of a mere application. Daudu and Abbas insisted that the subpoena itself must be produced and tendered before the witness could lawfully testify.

Responding, Pinheiro argued that the subpoena was already part of the court’s official records, having been issued by an order of court, and that there was no legal requirement mandating its tendering before a subpoenaed witness could give evidence. He described the defence’s objection as untenable, citing established legal authorities.

In his reply, Daudu maintained that the defence had a constitutional right to full disclosure, stressing that the trial was a public proceeding and that the defence was entitled to inspect and obtain a copy of the subpoena that formed the basis of the witness’s appearance.

Counsel to the third defendant, Abbas, supported the objection, arguing that the subpoena was fundamental to the witness’s presence and that the defence must be allowed to examine it before proceedings could continue.

Pinheiro countered by accusing the defence of attempting to delay the trial, a claim Daudu strongly denied, insisting that the defence had no intention of frustrating the judicial process.

In her ruling, Justice Anineh held that the subpoena could be produced before the court and consequently adjourned the matter to February 11 and 12, and March 11 and 12, 2026, for continuation of trial.

The case remains one of the most closely watched corruption trials involving a former state governor.