In response, the anti-graft agency’s spokesperson, Dele Oyewale, denied that the former governor was in its custody and added that Bello remains wanted.
However, Bello’s team, in another statement by its Director, Ohiare Michael, said Bello was at the EFCC office alongside his successor, Usman Ododo.
The former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, has insisted that he was at the facility of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
Earlier, the team said the former governor accepted the invitation after consulting with his legal team and political associates.
He stated that the EFCC did not interrogate him and instead informed him he could leave.
Michael stated, “Earlier today, we reported the voluntary visit of Yahaya Bello, former Governor of Kogi State, to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission office to honour the Commission’s invitation.”
“In the statement, we emphasised the former Governor’s deep respect for the rule of law and constituted authority, emphasising that he had merely sought the enforcement of his fundamental rights to ensure due process.
“The EFCC, however, did not interrogate him because officials told him he could leave. We’re not sure what this implies yet.
“ As of this writing, Yahaya Bello has departed the EFCC office. He was accompanied by Ahmed Usman Ododo, the Governor of Kogi State.
“Recall that the case was heard in a competent court of jurisdiction, and Alhaji Yahaya Bello was properly represented by his legal team at all hearings.
The former Governor chose to accept the invitation to clear his reputation since he had nothing to conceal and nothing to fear.
Bottom Line
The situation surrounding former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello’s visit to the EFCC headquarters highlights the complexities of high-profile investigations involving political figures in Nigeria.
On one hand, Bello’s voluntary visit to the EFCC office, accompanied by his successor, Usman Ododo, reflects a willingness to engage with the investigation and demonstrate respect for due process.
His media team emphasized that he was not interrogated and was told he could leave, which suggests that the visit may have been more procedural than substantive at this point.
However, the EFCC’s statement that Bello remains wanted raises questions about the nature of the visit and whether it signifies any meaningful development in the case.
This discrepancy between the EFCC’s position and Bello’s media team’s account may indicate a larger strategy at play, with both sides attempting to control the narrative surrounding the investigation.
