Two separate suits filed by former Senate President Bukola Saraki against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and other parties were adjourned by a Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday.

Justice Inyang Ekwo announced the adjournment to await the report from the Court of Appeal regarding Saraki’s application for a stay of proceedings.

During the hearing, Saraki’s lawyer, Tunde Afe-Babalola, informed the court about a pending application for a stay of proceedings filed on July 30, 2021. He confirmed that all parties had been served and were ready to proceed. However, the EFCC’s counsel, Christopher Mshelia, expressed uncertainty about whether the commission had been served and stated that they were not prepared for the hearing.

Ekenma Okafor, representing the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), stated that his client had not been served and expressed surprise at the information shared by Afe-Babalola. The judge questioned why Saraki’s legal team had filed a stay of proceedings both at the Court of Appeal and at the Federal High Court. Justice Ekwo decided to give Afe-Babalola time to resolve matters at the Court of Appeal and set a new date for the report.

The case was adjourned until April 18 to await the report from the Court of Appeal. Previously, on January 25, 2023, Justice Ekwo had struck out the suits due to a lack of diligent prosecution. Saraki subsequently filed an application to relist the cases, which led to the current proceedings.

The suits filed by Saraki involved the Attorney-General of the Federation, Inspector-General of Police, State Security Service, EFCC, Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), and CCB as defendants. Saraki had filed the suits in response to the EFCC’s decision to investigate his earnings during his tenure as governor of Kwara State from 2003 to 2011. The suits sought to challenge the EFCC’s actions, including the reported seizure of some of Saraki’s properties.

The court has previously issued an order for the parties to maintain the status quo and suspend the probe pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice. However, there have been subsequent developments, including the transfer of the case from one judge to another.