Former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Adoza Bello, on Thursday, July 17, 2025, lost his bid to secure the temporary release of his passport for a medical trip to the United Kingdom.

Justice Maryanne Anineh of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Maitama, Abuja, struck out his application, citing a lack of jurisdiction over the travel document.

Bello is currently being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) alongside Umar Shuaibu Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu. 

They face a 16-count charge that includes criminal breach of trust and money laundering, totalling N110.4 billion.

At a previous sitting, Bello, through his counsel, J.B. Daudu, SAN, had filed an application on June 20, 2025, requesting the temporary release of his passport to attend a scheduled medical appointment in the UK. 

His counsel provided an undertaking to return the passport to the court upon his return.

However, prosecution counsel Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN, urged the court to deny the request. Enebeli argued that the application sought to alter the defendant’s existing bail conditions, which mandated him to deposit his passport with the court. 

He further contended that Bello’s sureties should have been notified to confirm their willingness to continue as sureties if he were permitted to travel.

The prosecution also submitted that Bello had abused the court process by filing a similar, still-pending application in another court.

“The proper thing would have been for the defendant to retrieve his passport from the other court and then apply for a travel permit before this court. Asking both courts to release the same passport at the same time creates the risk of conflicting orders, which is an abuse of process,” Enebeli stated.

At the resumed sitting on Thursday, prosecution counsel Jami’u Agburo confirmed the prosecution’s readiness for the ruling.

In her ruling, Justice Anineh held that her court lacked the authority to grant the application because Bello’s passport was not in its custody. 

“A review of the court’s record revealed that the applicant had previously been ordered to deposit his passport and other travel documents with the registry of the court,” Justice Anineh explained. 

“However, upon further inquiry and search conducted by the court, it was discovered that the said passport was not presently in the custody of the court’s registry but with the Federal High Court.”

Justice Anineh emphasised the logical impossibility of the passport being held by two courts simultaneously. 

“The defendant even deposed to an affidavit himself, stating that his passport had been deposited with the Federal High Court in a bail earlier granted him,” she noted. 

“The simple logic is that the passport cannot be with two different courts at the same time. Since the defendant admitted depositing the passport with the Federal High Court, there is no reason to make any order here in regard to the application. Courts don’t make orders in vain, and as such, this court will not make any order that will be in vain since the passport in issue is not with this court but the Federal High Court.”

The case has been adjourned until October 8, 9, and November 13, 2025, for the continuation of the trial.