Ann Bello, daughter of the late Justice Moses Bello, a former President of the Abuja Customary Court of Appeal, has issued a 14-day ultimatum to the executors of her father’s will. She demands a DNA test be conducted on all of her father’s children to ascertain their biological relationship to him. This demand stems from a recent court judgment that invalidated a codicil to her father’s will, leaving the original will as the sole legally binding document outlining the distribution of his estate. Ann contends that the DNA testing is a prerequisite for inheritance as stipulated in the original will, and failure to comply will result in criminal charges against the executors for breach of trust.
The core of the dispute revolves around the distribution of Justice Bello’s assets. Ann had previously challenged the executors’ allocation of her inheritance, arguing she was entitled to 11.11% of her father’s estate, as stipulated in the original will, rather than the 4.16% she was offered based on the now-invalidated codicil. The codicil, which sought to amend the distribution outlined in the original will, was deemed invalid by Justice Zubairu of the FCT High Court in Kurudu, Abuja, because it did not meet the legal requirements for such a document. This ruling effectively reinstated the terms of the original will, which Ann now insists must be followed, including the provision regarding DNA testing.
The demand for DNA testing appears to target specific individuals identified as Joseph Asuku Bello and six others. The notice, served through Ann’s counsel, Victor Giwa, specifically names Reverend Father Ezekiel Awolumate, the parish priest of Christ the King Catholic Church, Okene, as a will executor and accuses him, along with members of her stepmother, Mary O. Bello’s family, of conspiring to disinherit her. The notice alleges that this conspiracy took place after her father’s death and the reading of his will. The court’s invalidation of the codicil has emboldened Ann’s pursuit of what she believes is her rightful inheritance, leading to this ultimatum.
The notice explicitly states that the DNA testing is a “precondition for the entitlement of their inheritance under the Will.” This implies that those individuals subject to the DNA test may risk losing their claim to any inheritance if they refuse or if the results of the test question their biological link to the deceased. Furthermore, the notice warns against any further transactions or dealings with the estate’s assets, threatening legal action against any party involved in such activities. This underlines Ann’s determination to ensure the original will’s provisions are respected, particularly regarding the distribution of her father’s assets.
The 14-day deadline adds a layer of urgency to the matter. It puts the executors in a difficult position, requiring them to orchestrate the DNA testing within this tight timeframe or face potential criminal charges. The threat of legal action against the executors underscores the seriousness of Ann’s demands. The notice not only demands compliance with the will but also serves as a warning against any attempts to circumvent its provisions.
This family dispute, centered on inheritance and potentially contested paternity, highlights the importance of clear and legally sound estate planning. The invalidation of the codicil emphasizes the need for strict adherence to legal procedures when amending a will. The situation underscores the potential for family conflicts and legal battles in the absence of clear and unambiguous testamentary documents. Ann Bello’s actions, driven by the pursuit of her perceived rightful inheritance, have now placed the onus on the will’s executors to comply with the original will or face legal consequences. The upcoming weeks will be crucial in determining the outcome of this dispute and the future distribution of Justice Bello’s estate.
