The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court orders bank to pay ex–deputy gov N1.07b

    Court orders bank to pay ex–deputy gov N1.07b

    The National Industrial Court (NIC) in Abuja has ordered a first generation bank to pay a total of N1.07 billion to the former Deputy Governor of Kogi State, Elder Simon Achuba, being satisfaction of a judgment debt owed by the state government.

    During the trial of the case, Femi Falana (SAN), represented the ex-deputy governor,  while Paul Daudu, (SAN), appeared for the Kogi State Government.

    Apart from the order for payment, the industrial court chided the respondents counsel, Daudu, for acting unprofessionally.

    The court observed: “I will not conclude this ruling without making some comments regarding the JD application. I have observed that same was brought malafide for the fact that it seeks to set this court in collision with the express orders of the Court of Appeal and the provisions of section 243 (3) of the CFRN.

    “This conduct I must say is most unprofessional and does portray the bar in good light. Consequently, cost of N1million only is awarded against the judgment debtor counsel, in favour of the judgment creditors.

    “On the whole, the objection lacks merit, same is hereby dismissed.”

    Read Also: Court orders FG, NNPC boss, EFCC to respond to suit seeking Ojulari’s sack

    Justice R. B. Haastrup made the Order Absolute on November 27 after holding that the bank failed to provide credible evidence to prove that the funds in a Kogi State Government account it holds were sourced from the World Bank or jointly owned by 19 northern states, as claimed.

    Achuba, represented by human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN), had urged the court to make the earlier garnishee order nisi absolute, following the bank’s admission that it held sufficient funds in the Kogi State ACRESAL Noida designated account (a dollar account) to satisfy the judgment.

    The bank, however, through its counsel, argued that the funds were World Bank–supported monies for environmental projects across northern states and therefore could not be used to settle the judgment debt.

    Justice Haastrup disagreed, holding that the bank supplied no documentary evidence to back its claims.

    The court stated that since the bank had already revealed the existence of sufficient funds in the relevant account, and no proof showed the money was restricted or jointly owned, the law required the court not to deprive a successful litigant of the fruits of his judgment.

    The court therefore ordered the bank to immediately pay: N1,070,860,138 being the outstanding judgment sum; N2 million, the cost awarded by the Court of Appeal; and N1 million as costs of the garnishee proceedings.

    The total payment is to be made into Achuba’s Access Bank account as provided in the order.

    Justice Haastrup also discharged all other banks initially joined as garnishees, including Zenith Bank, First Bank, GTBank, Access Bank, Polaris Bank, and others.

  • Ex-AMCON MD diverted N4.9billion Arik funds, staff to float NG Eagle, witness tells court

    Ex-AMCON MD diverted N4.9billion Arik funds, staff to float NG Eagle, witness tells court

    A Lagos State Special Offences Court yesterday heard how a former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), Ahmed Kuru, allegedly diverted N4.9 billion belonging to the defunct Arik Air Limited to establish a new airline, NG Eagle Airlines.

    Testifying before Justice Mojisola Dada, an investigative officer with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Bawa Kaltungo, said the diversion was uncovered during the Commission’s probe of the defendants.

    Kuru is standing trial alongside Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Union Bank Plc, and Super Bravo Limited.

    Led in evidence by the lead prosecution counsel, Dr. Wahab Shittu (SAN), Kaltungo said a statement provided by Arik’s former Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Jonathan Sani, provided the details of how N4.5 billion was moved from Arik to fund NG Eagle, an airline allegedly owned and controlled by the defendants.

    The EFCC investigator explained that Kuru, Omokide, and Ilegbodu allegedly conspired to move a total of N4.9 billion out of Arik’s assets to float the new airline, while also transferring Arik employees to NG Eagle.

    Read Also: Osimhen wants Onyedika at Galatasaray

    According to him, NG Eagle was incorporated while Kuru was still the MD of AMCON, and Omokide served as Receiver Manager over Arik, creating a conflict that facilitated the alleged diversion.

    Kaltungo told the court that Arik Air continued to bear the burden of salaries and operational expenses for NG Eagle’s workers during its formative stage.

    During proceedings yesterday, the court admitted several documents, including a certified ex parte order, marked P17.

    Other admitted materials – labelled P18, P25, P26, P44, and P45 – included photographs and a flash drive containing a video of vandalised aircraft, which was played in open court.

    “This investigation report is based strictly on documentary evidence recovered during the course of our work,” Kaltungo told the court.

    Counsel to the second and third defendants applied for the release of their clients’ passports for renewal and medical travel.

    Justice Dada granted the request but ordered that the passports be returned to the court registry on or before January 2, next year.

    The court adjourned the matter to the earlier scheduled dates as well as March 2 and 3, next year, for continuation of trial.

  • Request for transfer: Court orders Nnamdi Kanu to serve motion on FG, prison service

    Request for transfer: Court orders Nnamdi Kanu to serve motion on FG, prison service

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered convicted leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu to serve on the Federal Government and the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) his motion seeking to be transferred from the Sokoto prison.

    In a ruling on Monday, Justice James Omotosho declined to grant the motion ex-parte Kanu filed, but instead, ordered him to serve the Fed Govt and the NCoS to enable them responded accordingly.

    Kanu, in the motion ex-parte prayed for “an order compelling the complainant (Federal Government)!and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to forthwith transfer him from the Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial facility within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.”

    Alternately, he sought an order transferring him to the court’s “immediate environs, such as the Suleja or the Keffi Custodial Centre, for the purpose of enabling the applicant (Kanu) to effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.”

    At the commencement of proceedings on Monday, Kanu’s lawyer, Demdoo Asan from the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON) moved the ex-parte motion.

    Justice Omotosho then drew Asan’s attention of to the first prayer in the motion ex-parte, which is for an order “compelling” the Federal Government and NCoS to transfer the convict to a correctional facility that is close to the jurisdiction of the court.

    The judge asked Asan if he would like to insist on the first prayer particularly as it relates to the word: “compel” used in the ex-parte motion.

    Justice Omotosho equally asked Asan if the prosecution and the NCoS, in whose custody Kanu’s is currently being kept, ought to be served with the motion or not.

    The judge added, “You are from Legal Aid Council counsel? Do you think it is by ex-parte motion this application ought to be granted, having it in mind that judgment was delivered when the two parties were present?

    “Also, among the respondents to obey the order is the correctional service and you think it is through ex-parte motion that the court can make the order for his transfer?

    “Don’t you think this application should have come by motion on notice,” the judge asked.

    Responding, Asan admitted that the respondents (prosecution and the NCoS) ought to be put on notice to enable them respond.

    Asan added, “My lord, the respondents have the right to be heard. Usually, the court can make an order that they should be put on notice.” 

    The lawyer said he agree with the judge’s observation that the respondents should be heard and that the motion ex-parte could not be taken now.

    Asan said, “They (the respondents) should be heard. We will be applying that the complainant and other parties involved should be put on notice.

    Ruling, Justice Omotosho struck out the first prayer in Kanu’s motion ex-parte, as requested by his lawyer.

    The judge then ordered that the prosecution and the NCoS be served with the motion for them to respond in the interest of justice. 

    He faulted the notice of appeal which Kanu filed on November 10 before the court’s November 20 judgment, which convicted him and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

    Justice Omotosho said based on the judgment delivered by his court on November 20, there is no notice of appeal before his court.

    He then adjourned till January 27, 2026 to enable the Kanu serve the prosecution and NCoS as ordered by the court and for the motion to be heard.

  • Court declares police wanted notice on lawyer illegal

    Court declares police wanted notice on lawyer illegal

    The Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday declared unconstitutional the police’s publication of lawyer Emmanuel Chinyere Orji (N.C. Orji) as a wanted person.

    It held that the action was taken without lawful authority.

    Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa set aside the police declaration and granted all the reliefs sought by the applicant, except N1billion damages.

    The court instead awarded N500,000 as costs against the Nigeria Police Force.

    The suit was initiated by Orji’s counsel, Edwin Anikwem (SAN), leading Yinka Muyiwa, under the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules.

    Orji had approached the court seeking to nullify the publication of his name and photograph in The Nation, the Police Special Gazette Bulletin, and on the police official website.

    The publications, dated August 20, 2025, had declared him wanted.

    Justice Lewis-Allagoa held that the Police acted outside their constitutional and statutory powers by issuing the wanted notice without first obtaining an order from a court of competent jurisdiction.

    Read Also: S’Court to FG: implement judgment on direct allocations to LGs

    The judge affirmed that although the Police may, in certain circumstances, publicise a wanted declaration, such action must strictly comply with the law and the necessary conditions precedent, chief among them being prior judicial authorisation.

    According to the court, the failure to comply with these legal requirements amounted to a violation of Orji’s fundamental rights.

    Citing the authorities relied on by the applicant, the judge said: “The act of declaring the applicant a wanted person on the official website of the police without any prior order or leave of a court of competent jurisdiction, first had and obtained, is unconstitutional and constitutes a violation of the Applicant’s fundamental rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement as guaranteed under Sections 34 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”

    Justice Lewis-Allagoa declared the publication illegal and ordered the Inspector-General of Police to retract and quash the wanted notice. The court also directed that a formal apology be issued to Orji.

  • Court summons social media activist for defaming minister

    Court summons social media activist for defaming minister

    The Federal High Court Jalingo has ordered the arrest of a Social Media activist Abdulmumuni Imam, for allegedly defaming the Minister of State, Regional Development Barrister Uba Maigari.

    In a trending post on his verified Facebook page, Imam alleged that the Minister diverted ₦16.5 billion contract sum for the reconstruction of Namnai Bridge in Gassol Local Government Area of Taraba State, leading to non- commencement of work on the bridge.

    Counsel to Alhaji Maigari, Dr Ibrahim Effiong Esq, while addressing journalists in Jalingo on Friday, said that the ‘self-acclaimed Social Media activist’ made accusations against the Minister, pitching him against the people of the state and gravely injuring his reputation.

    He explained that his client was only seeking for the handler to come and defend his claims before the Court so that the records will be set straight.

    Read Also: Shettima reaffirms Tinubu administration’s commitment to traditional institutions

    “My client, the Honourable Minister of State Regional Development has been inundated with reports on the Social Media, credited to one Abdulmumuni Imam, alleging the diversion of over ₦16.5 billion meant for the reconstruction of the Namnai Bridge that collapsed since last year.

    “As a reputable legal luminary and law abiding citizen, the Minister deemed it important for the man to prove his claims before the Court. He has been invited and rather than appearing to defend himself, he has gone on the same social media to start making allegations that security people were looking for him. We didn’t approach any security agencies. Rather we went to the Court.

    “I think it is important for people to be held responsible for their content on the Social Media. Yes we have freedom of speech but it comes with a responsibility of utilising it responsibly. That is the only way to protect the sanctity of that space. Besides, activism comes with bravery and responsibilities too. If you want to attack people on the guise of activism, you should be of no questionable character. And so I don’t understand why he is running from the Court which is for everyone.

    “I must say that this is not about seeking compensation or claiming damages. It’s not about the money at all. This is about putting the records straight. The Honourable Minister is not above the law and if he is able to prove that the minister is truly in the wrong, the law will take its course. Otherwise, he should face the discipline of behaving irresponsibly in the public space” Effiong said.

  • Appeal Court affirms ruling barring VIO from stopping, impounding vehicles

    Appeal Court affirms ruling barring VIO from stopping, impounding vehicles

    • Cost against VIO rises to N3.5m

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja has affirmed the October 2, 2024 judgment of a Federal High Court in Abuja which barred the Directorate of Road Traffic Services (DRTS), also known as VIO, from further stopping, impounding or confiscating vehicles on the road and imposing fines on motorists.

    In a judgment yesterday, a three-member panel of the appellate court resolved the three issues identified for determination against the appellant, the DRTS.

    Justice Oyejoju Oyebiola Oyewumi, who delivered the lead judgment, held that the appeal was without merit.

    Justice Oyewumi awarded a cost of N1 million against the appellant and in favour of the respondent, an Abuja-based rights activist and public interest lawyer, Marshall Abubakar.

    The N1 million cost awarded by the Court of Appeal is in addition to the N2.5 million cost earlier awarded by the Federal High Court against the DRTS and its officials.

    Abubakar had filed a suit against “VIO” at the Federal High Court in Abuja, claiming that some DRTS officials confiscated his Honda car without giving him a fair hearing.

    Sued along with the DRTS are: the Director of Road Transport; the Area Commander, Jabi; and the Team Leader, Jabi; and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    In the October 2, 2024 judgment, Justice Evelyn Maha upheld Abubakar’s case and granted all the reliefs sought by the plaintiff.

    Justice Maha agreed with the plaintiff that no law empowers the respondents to stop, impound, confiscate and seize vehicles or impose fine on motorists.

    Read Also: NICON Town residents urge court on trial over land

    The judge held that the first to the fourth respondents, who are under the control of the fifth respondent (FCT minister) are not empowered by any law or statute to stop, impound or confiscate vehicles and/or impose fines on motorists.

    She issued an order restraining the first to the fifth respondents, either through their agents, servants, and or assigns, from impounding, confiscating the vehicles of motorists, and or imposing fines on any motorist.

    Justice Maha held that doing so is wrongful, oppressive, and unlawful.

    The judge also issued an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents, whether by themselves, agents, privies, allies or anybody acting on behalf of the first respondent from further violating the rights of Nigerians to freedom of movement, presumption of innocence and right to own property without lawful justification.

    She awarded N2.5 million as cost against the defendants.

  • BREAKING: Appeal Court affirms judgment barring VIO from stopping, impounding vehicles

    BREAKING: Appeal Court affirms judgment barring VIO from stopping, impounding vehicles

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja has affirmed the October 4, 2024 judgment of a Federal High Court in Abuja barring the Directorate of Road Traffic Services (popularly called VIO) from further stopping, impounding, or confiscating vehicles on the road and imposing fines on motorists.

    In a judgment on Thursday, a three-member panel of the appellate court resolved the three issues identified for determination against the appellant, the Directorate of Road Traffic Services.

    Read Also: Court strikes out stealing charge against businessman

    Justice Oyejoju Oyebiola Oyewumi, who delivered the lead judgment, held that the appeal was without merit. She awarded a cost of N1million against the appellant and in favour of the respondent, a rights activist and public interest attorney, Abubakar Marshal.

    Details shortly…

  • Court warns EFCC boss over non-compliance with order to release 27 wrongly seized houses

    Court warns EFCC boss over non-compliance with order to release 27 wrongly seized houses

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has cautioned the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over the alleged continued failure to comply with its October 31 judgment directing the commission to immediately release 27 houses it had wrongfully seized, presuming they were acquired with proceeds of crime.

    The warning was issued on Tuesday in a Form 48 by the court’s Registrar and addressed directly to the EFCC Executive Chairman.

    It reads, “To the Executive Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of Plot 301/302, Institute and Research Cadastral District, Jabi, Abuja. 

    “Take notice that unless you obey the direction contained in the order of the Federal High Court, made on 31st October, 2025, which ordered you to immediately release the property documents to the property owners/respondents in suit no: FHC/ABJ/CS/348/2025, you will be guilty of contempt of court. 

    “A copy of the said order of court which was earlier served on you is hereby annexed for ease of reference.

    “This court has been informed that even as at today, Tuesday, 2nd December, 2025 you are yet to comply with the lawful order of the Federal High Court by refusing to release the property documents to the property owners/respondents. 

    “You are hereby directed to comply with the order forthwith or you will be guilty of contempt of court.” 

    The EFCC had, on March 13 obtained an ex-parte interim forfeiture order against the 27 properties located across the country, and which th court ordered it to publish within 14 days for interested parties to appear and show cause why they should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

    Following its publication of the interim forfeiture order in the Punch newspaper of April 4 as ordered by the court, James Ikechukwu Okwete and his company, Jamec West African Limited claimed ownership 26 of the properties, while Adebukunola Iyabode Oladapo showed interest in House No: 12 Fandriana Close, Wuse 2, Abuja.

    Okwete, Jamec Ltd and Oladapo objected to EFCC’s subsequent application for final forfeiture of the properties.

    In a judgment on October 31, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik upheld the objection by Okwete, Jamec and Oladapo, dismissed EFCC’s application for final forfeiture; vacated the earlier order for interim forfeiture and ordered the commission to immediately release the properties.

    In the October 31 judgment, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik said based on her analysis of the evidence presented before the court, “I firmly find that the property owner/respondent’s (Okwete’s) affidavit to show cause has merit. 

    “Additionally, I hold in favour of the Adebukunola lyabode Oladapo being person interested in House No: 12 Fandriana Close, Wuse 2, Abuja, FCT, that since the learned senior counsel for the applicant (EFCC) has informed court that it has no objection to her affidavit to show cause, that her affidavit filed to show cause, stands substantiated in its entirety. 

    “Without more, I forthwith set aside and vacate in its entirety the interim order of Forfeiture granted on 13th March 2025 to the applicant in respect of the properties listed in the schedule attached to the applicant’s ex-parte originating motion. 

    “Accordingly, I order the immediate release of the aforementioned properties/its documents to the property owner/respondent and the House No: 12 Fandriana Close, Wuse 2, Abuja, FCT to Adebukunola lyabode Oladapo respectively. 

    “In that vein, the applicant’s motion for final forfeiture along with the corresponding responses filed are now otiose. I so hold,” Justice Abdulmalik said.

    However, lawyer to Okwete and Jamec Ltd, Serekowei Larry (SAN) has written to the Chairman of the EFCC complaining about the commission’s alleged failure to comply with the judgment.

    The November 27 letter written by Larry on behalf of Okwete and Jamec Ltd reads: “We write as counsel to Mr. James Okwete and his company ~ Jamec West Africa Ltd ‘the property owners,’ to formally apprise you of the events that have followed this case since 31th October, 2025 when judgment was given against you. 

    “As indicated above, judgment was given by the Federal High Court, coram: Hon. Justice Joyce O. Abdulmalik on Friday 31th October, 2025 in presence of your counsel, led by Maryam Hayatudeen Esq. 

    “On 14th November, 2025, the judgment order was served on your good office and nothing was done to obey it. 

    “On 26th November, 2025, the Federal High Court through its Enforcement Unit, led by Mrs. Lilian Amenger, proceeded to your office to execute the judgment which simply required your office to hand over the title documents of the properties, subject matter of the suit to the officials of the court, 

    “In straight words, your office refused to do so, thereby blatantly disobeying the said judgment which in its penultimate paragraph used the words, ‘the immediate release.’

    “In any regime, talk less of a democracy, it will be the height of it, if judgments of court are blatantly disobeyed. We however, want to believe that you are not aware of what happened, hence this letter. 

    “We anticipate your positive reactions within reasonable time before we take further steps.”

  • Alleged criminal defamation: Court grants FG’s request to shift Natasha’s trial till next year

    Alleged criminal defamation: Court grants FG’s request to shift Natasha’s trial till next year

    A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) sitting in Maitama has granted the request by the prosecution to shift further hearing in the alleged criminal defamation charge brought against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

    At the mention of the case, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s lawyer, Ehiogie West Idahosa (SAN) announced his appearance and told the court that the prosecution was not represented.

    Justice Chizoba Oji said the court received a letter from the prosecution requesting an adjournment and later had the letter handed to Idahosa who said he was not served with it.

    Idahosa said he observed that the letter was registered and filed on Monday morning. 

    He argued that the prosecution’a request for adjournment was not brought to the notice of the defence 48 hours before the court’s sitting, as required.

    The defence lawyer urged the court to proceed with the business of the day, since the defendant was in court and the application for adjornment was incompetent.

    He said court’s business for the day was the hearing of the defendant’s preliminary objection

    Ruling, Justice Oji said she agreed that the application for adjournment did not meet the required threshold, but added that she would grant the adjornment in the interest of justice.

    She rejected Idahosa’s prayer to proceed with the court’s business for the day. The judge subsequently adjourned till February 23 next year.

    The Senator was accompanied to court on Monday by her husband.

    Akpoti-Uduaghan is charged with criminal defamation in relation to her claim that the Senate President, Senator Godswill Akpabio and ex-governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello planed to kill her.

    In her preliminary objection, Akpoti-Uduaghan is querying the decision of the office of the AGF to filed two similar charges against her at the same time.

    But, in its counter affidavit filed against the preliminary objection, the prosecution has faulted claim by Akpoti-Uduaghan that the charges filed against before the HIgh Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and the Federal High Court in Abuja amounted to an abuse of court process.

    The prosecution stated that contrary to her claim, the three-count charge before the HIgh Court of the FCT was filed against her “after a thorough Investigation of the case and a prima facie case was established.  

    Read Also: Immigration seizes Senator Natasha’s passport at airport 

    “The three-count charge was preferred against the defendant pursuant to the Penal code Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in the bonafide exercise of the prosecutorial powers of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended) and in the best interest of justice. 

    “The actions and conducts of the defendant/applicant (Natasha) contravened the penal code law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. 

    “The criminal charge against the defendant is borne out of the comprehensive and conclusive investigation of the case, including all petitions and parties related to the case by the Nigerian Police Force. 

    “All the petitions filed by the defendant were duly investigated and charges filed at the FCT High Court against her colleague senator. 

    “The Office of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation filed the criminal charge against the defendant after due regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process. 

    “The charge against the defendant is consistent with the extant laws and does not constitute an abuse of the legal and prosecutorial powers of the Office of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation,” the prosecution said.

  • Court sentences UNIPORT student to death for murder of girlfriend

    Court sentences UNIPORT student to death for murder of girlfriend

    The Rivers State High Court in Port Harcourt has sentenced a 400-level University of Port Harcourt student, Damian Okoligwe, to death by hanging for the murder of his girlfriend, Justina Otuene.

    Okoligwe, a Petrochemical Engineering student, killed Otuene, a 300-level Biochemistry student, on October 20, 2023, at his apartment in Mgbupba, Obio-Akpor Local Government Area. 

    He dismembered her body and attempted to dispose of the remains with a wheelbarrow before being arrested.

    Read Also: Appearance of two SANs halts court proceedings in GHL suit against AMCON

    Delivering judgment, Justice Chinwe Nsirim-Nwosu ruled that the prosecution had proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt, describing Okoligwe’s actions as intentional, calculated, coordinated, and evil. The court ordered that he be “hanged on the neck until confirmed dead.”

    Outside the courtroom, prosecuting lawyer Charles Mbaba welcomed the verdict, saying it would console the victim’s family and deter young people from resorting to harmful shortcuts in life.

    Osatawaji, the late Justina Otuene’s brother, also expressed satisfaction, noting that the judgment provided relief and a sense of justice for their family.