Recent developments surrounding Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja have raised serious questions about the integrity of judicial proceedings and the public perception of justice in Nigeria.
However, one important clarification is necessary: Justice Omotosho did not recuse himself from Yahaya Bello’s own trial. He withdrew from the separate N10 billion money-laundering case involving Ali Bello, Yahaya Bello’s nephew and Chief of Staff to Kogi State Governor Usman Ododo, and Dauda Sulaiman. The case concerns alleged diversion and money laundering involving Kogi State Government funds.
Justice Omotosho announced his recusal on September 24, 2026, following an unresolved controversy over alleged tampering with an exhibit already admitted in evidence. The controversy dates back to February, when a court registrar, Nasiru Zubairu Onimisi, allegedly admitted that WhatsApp messages had been deleted from a mobile phone tendered as an exhibit. The judge subsequently ordered the police and the Department of State Services to investigate the alleged tampering.
According to reports, Justice Omotosho ultimately concluded that continuing to preside over the matter could create perceptions capable of undermining confidence in the judiciary and the administration of justice. He therefore directed that the case file be returned to the Chief Judge for reassignment.
That development has understandably triggered reactions.
In a recent Facebook post, social commentator VeryDarkMan questioned the decision with the blunt phrase: “Where is the law?” He also referenced footage of Nnamdi Kanu challenging Justice Omotosho in court and shouting the same question during proceedings. Reports indicate that VeryDarkMan presented the development as part of a broader conversation about judicial authority, accountability and public confidence in the courts.
But there is an important distinction between questioning the consequences of a judicial decision and alleging that a judge has been influenced.
There is currently no verified evidence in the sources reviewed showing that Justice Omotosho was pressured by political authorities to withdraw from the case. The documented explanation is that the alleged evidence tampering remained unresolved and that the judge considered recusal appropriate to protect the credibility of the proceedings.
At the same time, the political context makes the controversy particularly sensitive.
Yahaya Bello has emerged as the APC candidate for Kogi Central in the 2027 senatorial election, after winning the party's primary. INEC's published candidate list also identifies him as the APC candidate for the district.
Bello is facing separate criminal proceedings over allegations brought by the EFCC. In one case before Justice Emeka Nwite, the EFCC alleges money laundering involving about N80.2 billion, while another case before Justice Maryanne Anenih involves allegations concerning approximately N110.4 billion. These remain allegations, and the courts have yet to establish criminal liability through final judgment.
This is where the political argument becomes unavoidable: should a political party give a major electoral ticket to a candidate facing ongoing corruption-related trials? That is a legitimate question for voters, party members and the wider public to debate. But the existence of a criminal trial is not itself proof of guilt.
The bigger issue is whether Nigerians can continue to have confidence that judicial proceedings involving politically powerful individuals will be conducted transparently, independently and according to established legal procedures.
Justice Omotosho's withdrawal may therefore raise questions, but the allegation of political interference requires evidence—not suspicion.
And perhaps that is the real question Nigerians should be asking:
If evidence can allegedly be tampered with inside a courtroom, who protects the integrity of the evidence? And when confidence in the process is shaken, where exactly is the law?
**Mazi Nnamdi Kanu asked it. VeryDarkMan has now asked it again: “Omotosho, where is the law?”**
0 Comments