In a dramatic development within the Nigerian judicial system, the Federal Capital Territory High Court sitting in Maitama, Abuja, has officially revoked the bail of Saleh Mamman, the country’s former Minister of Power. During a high-stakes session on Monday, May 11, 2026, Justice Maryann Anineh issued a bench warrant for the immediate arrest of the embattled former official after he failed to appear in court to face ongoing criminal proceedings related to a massive fraud case.
The disappearance of the former minister has sent ripples through the legal community and the general public, especially considering it follows closely on the heels of a landmark conviction. On May 7, 2026, just days prior to this latest court session, Mamman was found guilty by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court. In that separate but related matter, the court convicted him on a 12-count charge involving money laundering to the staggering tune of N33.8 billion. Since that verdict was delivered, Mamman has reportedly vanished, remaining out of circulation and leaving no traces for law enforcement to follow.
The proceedings on Monday before Justice Anineh involved a different set of allegations brought forward by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). In this particular trial, Mamman is standing as the first defendant alongside seven other individuals. They face a nine-count charge that includes conspiracy, obtaining money by false pretense, and intent to defraud. The financial magnitude of this specific case is nearly as vast as the one for which he was already convicted, involving a sum of N31,070,541,349.64 (Thirty-one Billion, Seventy Million, Five Hundred and Forty-one Thousand, Three Hundred and Forty-nine Naira, Sixty-four Kobo).
When the court convened on Monday morning, the absence of the primary defendant was the immediate focal point. Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, the lead counsel for the prosecution, drew the court's attention to the empty dock. He pointed out that Mamman’s absence was both glaring and unjustified. Oyedepo emphasized that the former minister's legal team had failed to provide any valid excuse or medical explanation for why their client was not present to face the charges against him. He further noted that Mamman had similarly failed to show up for his sentencing in Justice Omotosho’s court the previous Thursday, suggesting a calculated attempt to evade the reach of the law.
In response, Mamman’s lead defense counsel, Femi Atteh, SAN, offered a surprising legal argument. He contended that the burden of producing the defendant now lay with the prosecution and the state. Atteh argued that because Justice Omotosho had already convicted Mamman and issued a bench warrant against him on May 7, it was the responsibility of the EFCC and the security agencies to locate and bring him to court. He essentially suggested that his client was now a ward of the state’s pursuit, rather than a defendant under the obligation of bail.
The prosecution was quick to object to this line of reasoning. Oyedepo countered that as a private legal practitioner, it was not his duty to track down or account for the whereabouts of a defendant he did not represent. He argued that the defense could not simply abdicate their responsibility to ensure their client’s compliance with court dates.
“My lord, I do not hold the brief of the first defendant, so it is not my duty to inform the court of the whereabouts of his client,” Oyedepo stated passionately. “A defendant without reasonable justification absented from trial. There was a warrant issued by the Federal High Court which is yet to be executed as the defendant is still in hiding. I apply that his bail be revoked and that my lordship issues a bench warrant against him and to also summon the surety on the next adjourned date.”
Furthermore, the prosecution made a strategic move to prevent the trial from stalling indefinitely. Oyedepo urged the court to invoke Section 352, Subsection 4 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015. This specific provision allows a court to proceed with a criminal trial in the absence of the defendant, provided that the defendant has been notified of the trial and has no reasonable excuse for their absence. By moving to continue the trial, the EFCC aims to ensure that the judicial process against the other seven defendants moves forward despite Mamman’s status as a fugitive.
After considering the arguments from both sides, Justice Anineh delivered a firm ruling that favored the prosecution. She agreed that the defendant’s continued absence constituted a defiance of the judicial process. Consequently, she revoked the bail previously granted to Mamman and issued a fresh bench warrant, commanding all law enforcement agencies to apprehend him and bring him before the court.
Justice Anineh also upheld the request to continue the trial in absentia. Citing the legal framework provided by the ACJA 2015, she ruled that the case would proceed to ensure the timely administration of justice. This decision ensures that the intricate details of the N31 billion fraud allegation will still be laid bare in open court, regardless of the former minister’s attempts to hide.
The court has adjourned the matter until May 14, 2026, for the continuation of the trial. As the search for the convicted former minister intensifies, this case remains a significant test of the Nigerian government’s ability to hold high-ranking former officials accountable for massive financial crimes. The twin cases against Mamman, totaling over N64 billion in alleged and proven fraudulent activities, represent one of the most substantial anti-corruption efforts in recent years. Law enforcement agencies are now under significant pressure to execute the warrants and return the fugitive to the courtroom to face the consequences of his actions.
