FORMER First Lady Dame Patience Jonathan’s associate, Ms. Esther Oba, has urged the Federal High Court in Lagos to vacate the order for the temporary forfeiture of N7.3 billion and $8.4 million allegedly linked to Mrs. Jonathan.
Justice Mojisola Olateregun made the order on April 20 based on a fresh application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Mrs. Jonathan, Globus Integrated Services, Finchley Top Homes Limited, AM PM Global Network Limited, Pagmat Oil and Gas Nigeria Limited, Magel Resort Limited and Ms. Oba are the respondents.
The monies are in different accounts in Skye Bank Plc, Diamond Bank Plc, Stanbic IBTC Bank and First Bank Plc and were opened in the respondents’ names.
Among them is $429,381.87 found in Mrs. Oba’s Skye Bank account numbered 211000170, which EFCC said is suspected to be “proceeds of unlawful activity”.
Justice Olatoregun directed EFCC to publish the order in a national newspaper within 14 days.
In a supporting affidavit, an EFCC investigator, Huleji Tukura, said the money was allegedly moved from Bayelsa State when Mrs. Jonathan was a permanent secretary.
But, in an application filed by her lawyer, Mr. Ige Asemudara, Mrs. Oba sought an order setting aside the ex parte order.
In a supporting affidavit by a lawyer in Ige’s firm, Simon Mark, Mrs. Oba said she learnt of the forfeiture order in a newspaper as she was not served with EFCC’s application despite the commission knowing her personally and her residence.
She said was detained for two days in January and asked to return on May 17 and, therefore, could have served her with the application yet EFCC “surreptitiously” went to obtain the order.
Mrs. Oba said she had explained in several statements to the EFCC that the money in the affected bank account belongs to her and that she lawfully earned it.
“We submit that the money in Mrs. Oba’s Skye bank account number 2110003170 is not unclaimed money as same is in the account validly opened and operated by her with all her details.
“Mrs. Oba has consistently laid claim to the money and exercise ownership rights over it. The money is also not a proceed of crime.
“We posit that the EFCC cannot impute crime to her or conclude that the money in her account is proceed of crime without first proving such crime beyond reasonable doubt,” Asemudara said.
She sought an order striking down the entire provisions of Sections 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 for being inconsistent with Sections 1, 36(5) and 44 of the 1999 Constitution (As amended).
Mrs. Oba accused the EFCC of concealing and misrepresenting material facts in obtaining the order.