The Nation Newspaper

Tag: EFCC

  • Rivers Govt kicks as EFCC probes N117b transactions

    Detectives are probing about N117b suspicious transactions by the government of Rivers State in the last three years.

    The huge cash was intermittently withdrawn over the counter by a state official designated for the purpose, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) sources said at the weekend.

    There were indications that the withdrawals from the state accounts were laundered by some state officials.

    The state government yesterday described the probe as a “political witch-hunt” and vowed not to be intimidated.

    Four suspects have been shortlisted for interrogation in connection with the massive withdrawals.  They include an official in charge of Finance and Accounts at the Government House in Port Harcourt and a cashier.

    The EFCC has detained a bank’s Managing Director (MD), who admitted that N5.2billion was realised as charges for the “controversial” transactions.

    According to the sources, the withdrawals were made in tranches of N10million with as many as 50 cheques cashed in a day.

    The sources said it was a case of “gross violation” of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act of 2011.

    One of the sources said: “Based on intelligence report, the EFCC swung into action.

    “Our findings indicated that the withdrawals were made in cash from the state accounts mostly by one person. There are no records of what the cash was used for. We are working on clues that it was diverted.

    “The EFCC team has obtained all the records of the withdrawals, including date and time. For instance, on June 8, 2015 barely few days in government, about 45 cheques amounting to N450million were cashed over the counter for no justifiable purpose.

    “Also, on June 9, 2015 about 50 cheques amounting to N500million were withdrawn. We will soon release the details of findings by our team.”

    Another source spoke of how a bank chief was quizzed last Thursday and released on administrative bail.

    “But he was asked to come back on Friday and we have been interacting with him up till Sunday. He admitted that all the withdrawals were made over the counter in cash.

    “He also said the bank benefited about N5.2billion from the charges collected on the transactions,” the source said.

    Another source said the bank was guilty of “lack of Suspicious Transaction Report(STR)” and violation of Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011, especially sections on special surveillance on certain transactions and Limitation to make or accept cash payment.

    The Act reads: “Special surveillance on certain transactions.

    “6. (1) Where a transaction –

    (a)     involves a frequency which is unjustifiable or unreasonable;

    (b)     is surrounded by conditions of unusual or unjustified complexity;

    (c)     appears to have no economic justification or lawful objective; or

    (d)     in the opinion of the Financial Institution or Designated Non-Financial Institution  involves terrorist financing or is inconsistent with the known transaction pattern of the account or business relationship, that transaction shall be deemed to be suspicious and the Financial Institution involved in such transaction shall seek information from the customer as to the origin and destination of the fund, the aim of the transaction and the identity of the beneficiary.

    (2)     A Financial Institution or Designated Non-Financial Institution shall within 7 days after the transaction referred to in subsection (1) of this section –

    (a)     draw up a written report containing all relevant information on the matters mentioned in subsection (1) of this section together with the identity of the principal and where applicable, of the beneficiary or beneficiaries;

    (b)     take appropriate action to prevent the laundering of the proceeds of a crime or an illegal act; and

    (c)     send a copy of the report and action taken to the Commission.

    (3)     The provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall apply whether the transaction is completed or not.

    (4)     The Commission shall acknowledge receipt of any disclosure, report or information received under this section and may demand such additional information as it may deem necessary.

    (5)(a)          The acknowledgement of receipt shall be sent to the Financial Institution or Designated Non-Financial Institution within the time allowed for the transaction to be undertaken and it may be accompanied by a notice deferring the transaction for a period not exceeding 72 hours.

    (b)     Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection, the Chairman of the Commission, the Governor of the Central Bank or their authorized representative shall place a Stop Order not exceeding 72 hours, on any account or transaction if it is discovered in the course of their duties that such account or transaction is suspected to be involved in any crime.

    (6)     If the acknowledgement of receipt is not accompanied by a stop notice, or where the stop notice has expired and the order specified in subsection (7) of this section to block the transaction has not reached the Financial Institution or Designated Non-Financial Institution, it may carry out the transaction.

    (7)     Where it is not possible to ascertain the origin of the funds within the period of stoppage of the transaction, The Federal High Court may, at the request of the commission, or others persons of authority duly authorized in that behalf, order that that the funds, accounts or securities referred to in the report be blocked.

    (8)     An order made by the Federal High Court under subsection (7) of this section shall be enforced forthwith.

  • Student who impersonates Laura George, arraigned in Lagos

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ) on Friday in Lagos arraigned a 28-year-old student, Adekunle Babalola, who allegedly impersonated a female singer, Laura George, for attempted defraud.

    Babalola, who resides at No. 2 Alaba Taiwo St., Kola in Alagbado area of Lagos, is facing a two-count charge of possession of documents containing false pretext at an Ikeja High Court.

    He, however, denied the charge but EFCC’s counsel, Mrs Zainab Ettu, told the court that Babalola committed the offences in Lagos on June 7.

    “He had in his possession an email dated Friday, March 23, 2018 in which he falsely represented to one Tommy whose email address is cuestus<tac754@yahoo.com that he was a female named Laura George.

    “He falsely claimed to Tommy using the false moniker that he was born in Ireland but grew up in the Philippines.

    “The defendant also had in his possession an email dated Thursday March 22, 2018 in which he falsely told one Rob Mckennie with email address rob.t.mckennie@gmail.com that he was Laura George.

    “On this occasion, he fraudulently informed Mckennie using his alias (Laura George) that he lives alone in New Zealand with no family and friends,’’ she said.

    The offences contravened Sections 1 (3), 6 and 8(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act 2006.

    The plea of the defendant was not taken and Ettu requested the court to remand him in prison.

    But the defence counsel, Mr Wale Adeboyejo, pleaded with the judge to make an order for his clients to be remanded in EFCC custody
    instead of prison.

    The vacation judge, Justice Obafemi Adamson, remanded the accused in Ikoyi Prison and adjourned the case until Sept. 3 for the hearing
    of the bail application.

  • Leave Benue officials alone, court orders EFCC

    The Federal High Court, Abuja on Monday, restrained the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from investigating Benue government officials pending the determination of the substantive originating summons.

    The order of the court will hamstring EFCC from taking further steps that will jeopardise a suit filed against it by the Benue government.

    The Benue government had filed the suit after the agency allegedly froze its accounts on Aug. 7.

    The vacation judge, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, who inherited the suit from another vacation judge said that he needed time to familiarise himself with the suit before he could hear it.

    Justice Dimgba adjourned the suit until Aug. 29 and ordered the EFCC to stop the investigation of Benue government officials pending the determination of the substantive originating summons.

    The suit was filed in Makurdi by the state government’s counsel, Mr Emeka Etiaba (SAN) who secured leave of court for the matter to be heard by a vacation court on the grounds that it was urgent.

    The suit was assigned to Justice Babatunde Quadri who on Aug. 9, summoned the EFCC to appear in court on Aug. 14 before transferring the matter to Justice Dimgba.

    The commission in its response said  it was only investigating some officials of the state government, against whom some citizens made allegations of diversion of public funds, money laundering and related offences.

    The EFCC said its activities in Benue were within its constitutional powers. It faulted claim by the Benue State’s Attorney General that the investigation being carried out amounted to usurping the functions of House of Assembly.

    It said its investigation in Benue was informed by petitions from indigenes of the state, including former Commissioner of Police, Abubakar Tsav and Joel Magnus, President of a group, Concerned Citizens of Benue State Transparency Anti-Corruption Group, Gboko, Benue State.

    It stated that the petitioners identified some officials of the state government, whom they accused of diverting the state’s funds and engaging in money laundering and other related financial crimes, a development, which informed why the state has been unable to pay staff salaries.

    “In carrying out its onerous duties, the 1st defendant, being a responsible agency of government, has employed the best practices of extending invitation to concerned State Government functionaries through high ranking government officials such as Secretary to the State Government, Permanent Secretaries of relevant ministries/agencies, Accountant General of the state and Liaison Officer, Benue State Liaison Office, Abuja without resorting to crude and uncivilised methods.

    “The 1st defendant is not investigating the accounts and/or appropriation, disbursement and administration of funds of Benue State Government. The 1st defendant is only investigating economic and financial crimes, money laundering related offences allegedly committed by some officials of Benue State Government.

    “The ongoing investigation cannot result into a shutdown or grinding to a halt, the activities of governance in Benue State as the 1st defendant is not an army of occupation. Indeed, the 1st defendant has not shut down government offices/business as it has been inviting relevant state government officials to make statements and/or furnish relevant documents as the need arises.

    “The ongoing investigation can only result in restoring the confidence of citizens of Benue State, who are calling for accountability, transparency and probity in the affairs of government of their state. It may well be that the outcome of investigation may prove the allegations as baseless, which is in the interest of the government of Benue State.

    “That contrary to the depositions contained in paragraphs 12 13 of the affidavit in support of the originating summons, the business of governance of Benue State has not in any way suffered or been destabilised consequent upon the ongoing investigation, as relevant officials only report as the need arises, who report and make statements and or bring relevant documents in furtherance of investigation.

    “That contrary to the depositions contained in paragraphs 21, 22 and 25 of the affidavit in support of the Originating Summons, it is not true that honouring invitations by relevant Benue State Government officials in furtherance of ongoing invitation is distracting or causing inconveniences to the officials invited, who by virtue of their offices and responsibilities/duties, their statements are crucial to the investigation, which is very painstaking.

    “That contrary to the depositions contained in paragraphs 23 and 24 of the affidavit in support of the originating summons, the statutory duties of the 1st defendant of investigating criminal allegations are never in conflict with the constitutional duties of the 4th defendant, hence there is no usurpation of the official functions of the 4th defendant, whose constitutional duties are quite distinct and different from the statutory duties of the 1st defendant.

    “The 1st defendant has never interfered with the federal principles relating to the tiers to the tiers of government, as the 1st defendant is only discharging its statutory duties.

    The Chief Press Secretary to Gov. Samuel Ortom, Terver Akase had raised the alarm on Aug. 7 over the freezing of the state government’s accounts by the EFCC before it was later unfrozen. (NAN)

  • Watch it, EFCC!

    •Need for caution so as not to be accused of partisanship

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) must watch its actions, especially with the 2019 general elections drawing near, so as not to be accused of acting a political script against perceived opponents of the party in control of the Federal Government. We offer this advice against the brouhaha that greeted the purported freezing of the accounts of Benue State government. It is even more intriguing that while a section of the media quoted sources in EFCC as denying the action, others claimed that the commission acted based on an interim order of court, obtained ex parte.

    If the commission froze those accounts based on a court order, then it can claim to have observed the fundamental precepts of rule of law; even as enquiry as to the propriety of the order shifts to the court that made the order. Of course, we agree that a court has discretion to grant an ex parte order, where the circumstances warrant that. But in exercising such discretionary powers, the court is enjoined to act judicially and judiciously. That perhaps explains why judges are circumspect in granting ex parte applications, but would rather order that the other party be put on notice.

    Again, we are aware that a judge grants an order ex parte based on facts presented to him by the applicant. Where an applicant presents false circumstances showing that grievous damages could result, if he is ordered to put the opponent on notice, the judge may grant an interim order based on balance of convenience. But in such circumstance, the applicant is enjoined to enter into an undertaking to pay damages, where subsequently the court finds out that it was misled to make that interim order ex parte. So, Nigerians would want to know who did what in the Benue saga.

    We acknowledge that the EFCC officially claimed to have been investigating the state government well before the governor and some of his officials defected from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). If it is so, the commission shouldn’t be estopped from taking any legitimate action within the law, because of change in partisan interests. But again, we expect the commission to act reasonably in the exercise of its enormous powers. With the power to arrest and detain suspects, the commission must not allow itself to become a scarecrow, with all the attendant negative forbearing influence on the general public.

    On the part of the court, if the judge acted wrongly in granting the interim order, the National Judicial Council (NJC) should apply sanction. To freeze the account of a state government is not a trivial matter, and before such an order can be made ex parte, those asking for the order must place compelling evidence of the urgent need to preserve the res.

    We commend the Chairman of the Nigerian Governors Forum, Abdulaziz Yari, for rising above partisan interests, to question the propriety of the order. The power to freeze a state account cannot be granted lightly, for, if the courts have such powers, then mutatis mutandis, it can also freeze the Federal Government’s accounts, over allegations of corruption.

    Those who argue lightly that an entire state account can be shut down must weigh the enormity of hardship such an action will visit on the innocent by-standers not accused of corrupt practices, like civil servants, patients in the state hospitals, pensioners, students in schools, amongst other vulnerable persons in the state. A more reasonable thing would be to target the officials allegedly involved in corrupt practice and obtaining an order of court to freeze their accounts. After all, there is no vicarious responsibility for alleged criminal conducts.

  • EFCC denies investigating Benue State Govt

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has denied investigating the accounts, appropriation and administration of funds of the government of Benue State.

    It faulted insinuations that it was working to cripple the government.

    The commission said it was only investigating some officials of the state government against who some citizens made allegations of diversion of public funds, money laundering and related offences.

    The EFCC said its activities in Benue were within its constitutional powers. It faulted claim by the Benue State Attorney General that the investigation being carried out by the EFCC in the state amounted to usurping the functions of the House of Assembly.

    The anti-graft agency made the explanation in its response to a suit  filed by the Benue State Government through the state’s Attorney General.  Defendants in the suit are EFCC, Speaker, Benue State House of Assembly, Clerk, Benue State House of Assembly and the Auditor General, Benue State.

    The EFCC, in its counter-affidavit to the plaintiff’s originating summons, stated that its investigation in Benue was informed by petitions from indigenes of the state, including former Commissioner of Police, Abubakar Tsav and Joel Magnus, President of a group, Concerned Citizens of Benue State Transparency Anti-Corruption Group, Gboko, Benue State.

    It stated that the petitioners identified some officials of the state government, who they accused of diverting the state’s funds and engaging in money laundering and other related financial crimes, a development, which informed why the state has been unable to pay staff salaries.

    The EFCC added: “In carrying out its onerous duties, the 1st defendant, being a responsible agency of government, has employed the best practices of extending invitation to concerned State Government functionaries through high ranking government officials such as Secretary to the State Government, Permanent Secretaries of relevant ministries/agencies, Accountant General of the state and Liaison Officer, Benue State Liaison Office, Abuja without resorting to crude and uncivilised methods.

    “The 1st defendant is not investigating the accounts and/or appropriation, disbursement and administration of funds of Benue State Government. The 1st defendant is only investigating economic and financial crimes, money laundering related offences allegedly committed by some officials of Benue State Government.

    “The ongoing investigation cannot result into a shut down or grinding to a halt, the activities of governance in Benue State as the 1st defendant is not an army of occupation. Indeed, the 1st defendant has not shut down government offices/business as it has been inviting relevant state government officials to make statements and/or furnish relevant documents as the need arises.

    “The ongoing investigation can only result in restoring the confidence of citizens of Benue State, who are calling for accountability, transparency and probity in the affairs of government of their state. It may well be that the outcome of investigation may prove the allegations as baseless, which is in the interest of the government of Benue State.

    “That contrary to the depositions contained in paragraphs 12 13 of the affidavit in support of the originating summons, the business of governance of Benue State has not in any way suffered or been destabilised consequent upon the ongoing investigation, as relevant officials only report as the need arises, who report and make statements and or bring relevant documents in furtherance of investigation.

    “That contrary to the depositions contained in paragraphs 21, 22 and 25 of the affidavit in support of the Originating Summons, it is not true that honouring invitations by relevant Benue State Government officials in furtherance of ongoing invitation is distracting or causing inconveniences to the officials invited, who by virtue of their offices and responsibilities/duties, their statements are crucial to the investigation, which is very painstaking.

    “That contrary to the depositions contained in paragraphs 23 and 24 of the affidavit in support of the originating summons, the statutory duties of the 1st defendant of investigating criminal allegations are never in conflict with the constitutional duties of the 4th defendant, hence there is no usurpation of the official functions of the 4th defendant, whose constitutional duties are quite distinct and different from the statutory duties of the 1st defendant.

    “The 1st defendant has never interfered with the federal principles relating to the tiers to the tiers of government, as the 1st defendant is only discharging its statutory duties.

    Yesterday, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba fixed August 29 for the hearing of the suit in which the plaintiff is challenging the propriety of EFCC’s ongoing activities in the state.

  • N254m car bribes: EFCC begins trial of Senator Bassey Akpan

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Monday filed charges at an Ikeja High Court against another serving senator, Albert Bassey, for allegedly receiving 12 cars as bribes worth N254 million.

    Bassey, 45, who is representing Akwa-Ibom North-East, received the vehicles between 2010 and 2014 from Olajide Omokore, a businessman, when he (Bassey) served as the Akwa-Ibom Commissioner for Finance.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the EFCC has slammed a 14-count charge bordering on corruption on the duo.

    Bassey is to face a seven-count charge of bordering on corruption as a public officer and for  inviting bribes as a result of his own action.

    On his part, Omokore is also facing a seven-count charge bordering on offering gratification to a public officer and giving bribe on account of the action of a public officer.

    The duo as well as their counsel were, however, absent in court on Monday when the case was announced for mention at 4.05 pm on Monday, according to NAN.

    Mrs Zainab Ettu, the prosecuting counsel for the EFCC, requested a new court date to enable the anti-graft commission arraign the senator and the businessman.

    “We do not have the defendants in court today, though we had earlier anticipated that we would have them in court at a later date.

    “We will be asking for a further date, most preferably, after vacation,” she said.

    Responding, the vacation judge, Justice Obafemi Adamson noted that the case had not been assigned to a judge, making it difficult to adjourn the case after vacation.

    The judge ordered that the case file should be sent to the Registry of the High Court for assignment to a judge, who will hear it.

    According to the charge sheet, Bassey received the vehicles from Omokore over a five-year period (2010-2014) in Lagos.

    Bassey received the bribes while serving as the Akwa-Ibom Commissioner for Finance and Chairman of the Akwa-Ibom State Inter-Ministerial Direct Labour Coordinating Committee (IMDLCC).

    On May 10, 2010, Bassey also allegedly corruptly received a BMW X5 BP worth N50 million from Omokore in December 2012 and another Infinity QX 56 BP worth N45 million from him.

    On November 2013, the serving senator received a Toyota Landcruiser V8 BP valued at N40 million and in March 2014, he received a Range Rover, also valued at N40 million from the businessman as well as in September 2014, another Toyota Hiace High Roof car valued at N27 million.

    Others are Toyota Hiace High Roof car valued at N16 million and six units of Toyota Hilux vehicles valued at N36 million.

    The anti-graft commission claimed that the car gifts were given to Bassey by Omokore in exchange for contracts from the Akwa-Ibom Government.

    The offences, according to the EFCC, contravene Sections 63 (1)(a), 64 (1)(a) and 98(1), (a), (i) of the Criminal Law of Lagos 2011. (NAN)

  • N3.5b London-Paris Club refund: EFCC set for trial of ex-bank MD, Saraki’s aide

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission( EFCC) is set for the trial of a former Managing Director of Societe Generale Bank of Nigeria( SGBN), Mr. Robert Mbonu and three others for alleged conversion of N3.5billion of N19billion London-Paris Club refund to states.

    The others are Melrose General Services Limited, the Senate President Deputy Chief of Staff Mr. Gbenga Makanjuola and Obiora Amobi.

    No date has been fixed for the trial of the suspects at a Federal High Court in Lagos.

    But the whereabouts of one of the suspects were unknown as at yesterday, leading to a delay in their arraignment.

    The EFCC said it might declare the affected suspect wanted.

    Makanjuola has been reporting to the EFCC to clear his name, insisting that he never stole NGF’s cash.

    Following protests by states over deductions for external debt service between 1995 and 2002, President Muhammadu Buhari approved the release of N522.74 billion (first tranche) refund to them, pending reconciliation of records.

    Each state was entitled to N14.5 billion or 25 per cent of the amount claimed.

    The release of the cash was  trailed by a huge controversy, including payment of N19billion consultancy fees and $86million into the accounts of the NGF.

    The EFCC in the last two years has been  investigating the alleged diversion of the N19billion under the guise of consultancy fees,  including the N3.5billion, which was allegedly remitted to Melrose General Services Limited, allegedly with links to Mbonu.

    About $183,000 of the N3.5billion was transferred to a Dubai jeweler patronised by some senators.

    In the charges against the suspects, the EFCC said there was no service rendered to have warranted the payment of the N3.5billion.

    The charges read in part: “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu, Melrose General Services Limited and other persons at large on or about the 14th day of December, 2016 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court conspired amongst yourselves to disguise the unlawful origin of the sum of N3.5billion paid into the account of Melrose General Services Limited and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18 of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 15 (3) of the same Act.

    “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu and Melrose General Services Limited  having reason to know that N3.5billion  directly represented the proceeds of your unlawful activity to wit: Conspiracy and Stealing: did convert the said funds which you received from the Nigeria Governors Forum under the false guise that you were entitled to payment of consultancy fees from money recovered for the states in relation to “over-deductions on Paris and London club loans on the account of the states and local government (1995-2002)” which service you did not render and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15(2) (b) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 15 (3) of the same Act.

    “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu and Melrose General Services Limited on or about the 14th December, 2016 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did retain in the Access Bank Plc Account No. 0005892453 operated by Melrose General Services Limited the sum of N3, 500,000,000.00 received from the Nigeria Governors Forum when you reasonably ought to know that the said money was a direct proceed of your unlawful activity to wit Conspiracy and Stealing: and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 15(2) ((1) 0f the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 15 (3) of the same Act.

    “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu and Melrose General Services Limited on or about the 20th of December, 2015 in Lagos wihln the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did transfer the sum 0f N50m being part of N3.5billion which represented the direct proceed of your unlawful activity to wit: (Conspiracy and Stealing) to Gbenga Makanjuola and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15(2) (b) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 15 (3) of the same Act.

    That you Gbenga Makanjuola on or about the 20th of December, 2016 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did make cash payment of the sum of N50, 000,000.00 (Fifty million naira) to Robert Chidozie Mbonu without going through a financial institution and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 1(a) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 201 1 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 16 (2) (b) of the same Act.

    “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu on or about the 20th of December, 2016 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did accept cash payment of the sum of N50million

    ) from Gbenga Makanjuola without going through a financial institution and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 1(a) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 16 (2) (b) of‘ the same Act.

    “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu and Melrose General Services Limited between the 15th December 2016 and 17th December, 2016 in Lagos Within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did transfer the sum of N300million being part of N3.5billion which represented the direct proceed of your unlawful activity (to wit Conspiracy and Stealing) to Obiora Amobi and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 15(2) (b) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 15 (3) of the same Act.

    “That you Obiora Amobi between the 15th December 2016 and 17th December, 2016 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did make cash payment of N300million  to Robert Chidozie Mbonu without going through a financial institution and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 1(a) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 16 (2) (b) of the same Act.

    “That you Robert Chidozie Mbonu on or about the 20th of December, 2016 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did accept cash payment of N300million  from Obiora Amobi without going through a financial institution and thereby committed an offence contraxy to section 1(a) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended by Act No. 1 of 2012) and punishable under section 16 (2) (b) of the same Act.

  • Alleged frozen account: Akwa Ibom sues EFCC for N50b

    AKWA Ibom State has sued the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for N50 billion following EFCC’s freezing of its account.

    This state is claiming N50 billion damages from the commission in a suit it filed in response to the alleged unlawful freezing of its account.

    The suit has the state attorney-general as claimant, with EFCC, federal attorney general, Zenith Bank, Skye Bank and United Bank for Africa  as defendants.

    It queried why the state’s accounts should be unlawfully frozen for over 72 hours.

    Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice  Uwemedimo Nwoko said  the suit would determine  “whether the accounts of Akwa Ibom State government held with banks or financial institutions fall within the financial crimes enforcement purview of Section 34 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Established) Act 2004”

    “Whether the account of Akwa Ibom State government with a bank or financial institution can be subjected to a freezing order pursuant to Section 34 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Established) Act 2004”

    The writ of summons, dated August 17, issued by Chief Assam E. Assam (SAN), instructed the defendants to appear within 30 days of service or risk judgment given in their absence.

    Explaining the summons, Nwoko said the anti-graft agency has no constitutional powers to freeze the state’s account.”

  • Magu’s chief of staff not under investigation, says EFCC

    THE Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has said Mr. Ola Olukoyede, the chief of staff to the acting chairman of the agency, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, is not under any investigation.

    It said Magu’s chief of staff was neither detained nor placed on suspension.

    The Head of Media and Publicity of EFCC, Mr. Wilson Uwujaren, made the clarifications in a statement in Abuja.

    The statement said: “The attention of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has been drawn to a news report headlined: “Magu’s Chief of Staff Under Investigation for Bribery and Unlawful Enrichment, “which was published by online news platforms, alleging that Mr. Ola Olukoyede, Chief of Staff to Ibrahim Magu, acting chairman EFCC, is under investigation for alleged corruption.

  • Alleged bribery: INEC chiefs have case to answer – Court

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on Wednesday dismissed a no-case submission filed by a former Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Administrative Secretary in Kwara State, Mr. Christian Nwosu.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) re-arraigned Nwosu for allegedly accepting gratification from former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke.

    He was re-arraigned along with Tijani Bashir before Justice Mohammed Idris.

    They were arraigned with another INEC official, Yisa Adedoyin, who pleaded guilty to the offence and was convicted following a plea bargain.

    Nwosu had initially pleaded guilty to receiving N30million bribe from Mrs. Alison-Madueke to rig the 2015 general election results, but he changed his plea to not guilty.

    The INEC official claimed he was induced by EFCC to plead guilty at first, but pleaded not guilty when he was re-arraigned.

    EFCC said they allegedly conspired to directly take possession of N264,880.000, which they reasonably ought to have known forms part of an unlawful act – gratification.

    They also allegedly made cash payment of N70,050,000 to Adedoyin, which exceeded the amount authorised by law without going through a financial institution.