Justice or Political Optics? EFCC, Yahaya Bello, and the Dangerous Illusion of Innocence.

By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by saharaweeklyng.com

“How the Rule of Law Is Being Tested by Power, Party Loyalty, and Public Distrust.”

The declaration by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) that former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Adoza Bello, remains “innocent until proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction” has reignited a fierce national debate and one that goes far beyond legal technicalities and strikes at the heart of Nigeria’s credibility in the fight against corruption.

On paper, the EFCC’s position is constitutionally sound. Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) clearly states that every person charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty. No democrat, no matter how critical of government, can legitimately dispute this principle.

Yet, in practice, Nigeria’s problem has never been the absence of laws, but it has always been the selective application of those laws.

The Charges and the Legal Process.

Yahaya Bello, who served as governor of Kogi State from 2016 to 2024, is standing trial over serious allegations of financial impropriety, including money laundering and misappropriation of public funds running into tens of billions of naira. The EFCC alleges that state funds were siphoned through proxies and shell arrangements, with properties acquired in high-value locations within and outside Nigeria.

The Commission maintains that it has followed due process, filing charges before a competent court and presenting witnesses and documentary evidence. The defence, on the other hand, argues that Bello’s name does not appear directly as a beneficiary in some transactions and that withdrawals cited were part of routine government operations.

This legal contestation is now before the judiciary, where evidence, cross-examination and judicial reasoning (not media narratives) will determine the final outcome.

EFCC spokespersons have reiterated that the agency does not convict; courts do. As one official succinctly put it, “It is not the EFCC that will declare anyone guilty. That responsibility lies squarely with the court.”

Presumption of Innocence vs. Public Reality.

While the law insists on presumption of innocence, public opinion tells a very different story.

Across Nigeria, from civil society spaces to academic circles and online platforms, a dominant perception has crystallized: many Nigerians believe Yahaya Bello is guilty, and that the system is merely buying time, managing outrage, and shielding power.

This belief is not born of sentiment alone. It is shaped by patterns Nigerians have observed repeatedly, where politically exposed persons aligned with the ruling party enjoy prolonged legal sympathy, procedural caution and rhetorical softness that rarely extend to opposition figures or politically expendable actors.

Political economist Dr. Pat Utomi once observed that “corruption in Nigeria thrives not because it is hidden, but because it is protected.” To many Nigerians, the Bello case fits squarely into this troubling pattern.

The APC Factor and Allegations of Selective Justice.

A central question continues to haunt public discourse:

Would this case be unfolding the same way if Yahaya Bello were not associated with the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC)?

This is where the EFCC’s moral burden becomes heavier. Critics argue that party affiliation has become an unofficial shield, blurring the line between legal prudence and political protection.

Human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong has warned that “when justice appears partisan, it ceases to be justice and becomes performance.” That warning resonates powerfully here. Nigerians are not necessarily rejecting the rule of law; they are questioning why the rule of law seems elastic for the powerful and unforgiving for the powerless.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo captured this national frustration bluntly when he stated:

“Nigeria does not lack laws; it lacks political will.”

For many observers, the Bello prosecution exposes precisely this deficit of will.

EFCC, Credibility, and the Burden of Trust.

The EFCC occupies a delicate space in Nigeria’s democracy. It is both a symbol of hope and a subject of suspicion. Its success depends not only on convictions, but on public trust.

When the Commission vigorously pursues certain individuals while appearing cautious or conciliatory toward others of equal or greater alleged culpability, it fuels the narrative of double standards. This perception (whether the EFCC accepts it or not) undermines its institutional authority.

Legal scholar Professor Adegoke Adelabu notes that:

“Anti-corruption agencies lose legitimacy not when cases fail, but when citizens believe outcomes are predetermined by politics rather than evidence.”

In the Bello case, even as the EFCC insists on legal propriety, the optics suggest hesitation, and that an impression that the agency is walking on eggshells because of political power dynamics.

Judiciary as the Final Arbiter.

Ultimately, the courts remain the last line of defense against injustice, both against wrongful conviction and against elite impunity. Nigerian judges are constitutionally empowered to weigh evidence, dismiss weak cases and convict where guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt.

However, the judiciary does not operate in a vacuum. Delays, adjournments, and procedural battles, though sometimes legally justified, often reinforce public cynicism, especially in high-profile corruption cases involving political heavyweights.

As respected jurist Justice Chukwudifu Oputa once warned:

“Justice delayed may be justice denied—not only to the accused, but to society.”

A Nation Tired of Legal Semantics.

For millions of Nigerians battling poverty, insecurity, and collapsing public services, this case is no longer just about Yahaya Bello. It is about whether accountability in Nigeria is real or selective.

To them, repeated reminders of “innocent until proven guilty” sound hollow when everyday Nigerians are punished swiftly and harshly for far lesser offences. The anger is not against the Constitution; it is against a system that appears to weaponize legality to protect the elite.

In the court of public opinion, many Nigerians have already reached their conclusion, not because they hate due process, but because experience has taught them how power behaves in Nigeria.

Final Reflection: Law, Power, and the Future of Accountability.

The EFCC is correct in law: only a court can pronounce guilt. But the Nigerian people are also correct in sentiment: justice must be seen to be fair, fearless, and consistent.

If Yahaya Bello is eventually acquitted based on evidence, the nation must accept it. But if the process collapses under political pressure, procedural manipulation, or endless delay, it will confirm the darkest fears of a people who already believe that APC membership comes with legal insurance.

As the late legal icon Chief Gani Fawehinmi (SAN) once declared:

“A society that abandons equal justice invites chaos disguised as order.”

Nigeria stands at that crossroads today. The Bello case is not just a trial, it is a test of conscience, for the EFCC, the judiciary, and the political class. History will remember not the press statements, but whether justice was truly done.