The Nation Newspaper

Tag: forfeiture

  • EFCC secures forfeiture of Amnesty’s N732.85m cash

    Justice James Tsoho of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the forfeiture of N732.85 to the Federal Government by 17 former officials of the Presidential Amnesty Programme Office.

    Forfeited is a plot of land situated at Katsina Road by Ogbomoso Road, Kaduna North Local Government, worth N190million. It is all believed to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

    Out of the cash, a former Coordinator of the Amnesty Programme, Gen. Paul Boroh, forfeited about N124million to the government.

    According to a statement by the Acting Head of Media and Publicity of the EFCC, Mr. Tony Orilade, Justice James Tsoho granted the application for the forfeiture on Friday.

    The EFCC sought the final forfeiture of N732.85million to the Federal Government.

    The commission secured the forfeiture following the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture proceedings.

    The statement said: “The forfeited sum of N732.85million was stolen from the Presidential Amnesty Programme Office by 17 respondents to the suit.

    “The 17 respondents to the suit include Paul Tarela Boroh, Hanafi Musa Moriki, Allotey Asari Edem, Joshua Ebiemeyefa, D. Wokoma, Bernard Ochoche, Cecilia Adebisi, Omofuma Faith, Olusegun Opeyemi Okungbure, Beggi Erepatei, Matti Abdul, Stella Nnamatti, Theresa Okoro, Chika Nsirim, Omonyemen Osunbor, Musa Odiringa, and Ode Martins Olajide.

    “Justice Tsoho had granted an interim forfeiture order on November 16, 2018, following the ex-parte application filed by the lawyer to the EFCC, Bar Abbah Mohammed.

    “The ex-parte motion was brought before the court, pursuant to Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act 2006, and Section 44(2)(B)(K) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), seeking for an order of interim forfeiture of the said sum and property.

    “Granting the interim forfeiture of the said N732.85million, Justice Tsoho also ordered the EFCC to advertise the order in the newspapers for any interested party to show cause within 14 days on why the money should not be forfeited to the government.

    “Investigations by the EFCC had uncovered the various sums of N124,000,000; N320,000,000; N68,768,916; N1,900,000; N5,125,000; N3,000,000; N28,595,755; N6,137,000; N40,000,000; N46,800,000; N16,315,000; N2,547,800; N3,900,000; N8,234,650; N6,800,000; N2,651,000, and N1,970,750 traced to the respondents, respectively.

    “The judge consequently ordered that the monies and property should be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.”

    The EFCC application for the forfeiture reads in part:

    • An interim Order of this Honourable Court forfeiting to the Federal Government of Nigeria the total sum of N124,000,000.00 (One Hundred and Twenty Four Million Naira) being part of funds disclosed by the Commission’s investigation to be in the possession of the 1st respondent ( Paul Boroh) and returned to the Commission via bank drafts as annexed to the supporting affidavit herein which sum is reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.
    • An interim Order of this Honourable Court forfeiting to the Federal Government of Nigeria a plot of land with certificate of occupancy number NC11065 situate at Katsina Road by Ogbomosho Road, Kaduna North Local Government measuring 1.1414 acres described in the survey plan with beacon nos. ZA.5475, ZA.5476, ZA.5477, ZA.5474 worth the sum of N190million  and the total sum of N320million being properties found by the Commission in the possession of the 2nd respondent ( Hanafi Musa Moriki) and returned to the Commission via title documents and bank drafts as annexed to the supporting affidavit herein which properties are reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.
    • An interim Order of this Honourable Court forfeiting to the Federal Government of Nigeria the total sum of N68,768,916.00  found by the commission in the possession of the 3rd respondent and returned to the Commission via bank drafts as annexed to the supporting affidavit herein which sum is reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.”

  • Oil marketers fret over assets forfeiture to banks

    Oil marketers have started re-negotiating with banks over the terms of the facilities they took from the lenders.

    This followed moves by lenders to take over the assets they used as collaterals for obtaining the facilities to import fuel, it was learnt at the weekend.

    The oil marketers include members of Major Marketers Association of Nigeria (MOMAN), Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN), and Depots and Petroleum Products Marketers of Nigeria (DAPMAN).

    It was gathered that the marketers have been visiting the directors of some of the banks to ask for more time as they await the Federal Government, which has promised to pay them subsidies amounting to about N800 billion, through which they intend to settle the debts.

    Industry sources said many of the marketers have been holding meetings with some banks’ chief executives on the issue, adding that some of them have acquiesced to the demand for extension.

    DAPMAN’s Executive Secretary, Mr Femi Adewole, affirmed this, saying marketers were looking for means of protecting their assets, adding that the banks were tired of taking excuses on the issue.

    Adewole said the development was expected, as marketers had no other means of running their operation, except through facilities, such as depots, fuel retail outlets and other highly valued equipment

    He said some marketers were still negotiating with banks, while others have concluded theirs.

    He refused to mention the names of the affected banks, saying the issue would further strain the relationship between the banks and the marketers.

    Speaking at the weekend, he attributed the development to the wrong signal, which the government sent to the public on the payment of subsidy arrears owed the marketers.

    Adewole said: “After the meeting among the Federal Executive Council, Debts Management Office (DMO), Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Product Petroleum Pricing and Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), House of Representatives’ Committee on Downstream Sector and marketers that the government is paying the subsidy arrears in both  promissory notes and cash, banks misconstrued the issue.’’

    “Banks thought the marketers have collected their monies and are not ready to pay back their debts. This made them to approach courts for injunctions to restrain marketers from using their facilities, which they eventually got. I am aware of two depots that have been seized by banks, as a result of the news that frittered to town that marketers have been paid subsidies owed them by the government.”

    According to him, marketers are sensing dangers and not ready to leave anything to chance, hence the moves by them to try and stop banks from carrying out further raids on their assets.

    He said the decision by the government to pay the debts in promissory notes does not show sincerity, adding that marketers have to go back to banks discount the promissory notes, and waste more time in the process.

  • Reps tighten noose on forfeiture, proceeds of crime

    The House of Representatives has commenced the process of tightening the noose on forfeiture of assets procured with proceeds of crime.

    The members of the lower chamber passed the bill before proceeding on its annual two month recess recently.

    The bill provides a legal and institutional framework for the confiscation, seizure, forfeiture, recovery and management of assets or proceeds derived from unlawful activities including instrumentalities used or intended to be used in the commission of unlawful activities.

    Sponsored by the Chairman of the House Committee on Financial Crimes, Kayode Oladele (APC, Ogun), the bill also seeks to harmonise and consolidate the existing legal frameworks, in addition to  seeking  to establish a central agency to manage the proceeds recovered from illegally acquired properties.

    According to a report from the Federal Ministry of Justice on the necessity for the passage of the bill as far back as 2014, the Proceeds of Crime Bill is a product of far reaching consultations and collaborations with stakeholders and development partners all in a bid to ensure that its provisions are in conformity with global best practices while also meeting Nigeria’s legal framework for rule of law.

    “Civil forfeiture represents the second generation of modern forfeiture laws. It is obvious that the interim character of civil forfeiture which avoids the need to prove a person’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt would have an obvious appeal to policymakers,” it was noted in the report.

    Other stakeholders including the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF)and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, have also at various times, called for the urgent passage of the Proceeds of Crime Bill which according to them would greatly assist the government in its anti-corruption campaign.

    According to an international lawyer, Akinwole Ogunlola stated that when signed into law, the bill will supersede the Executive Order Number 6 of 2018 on the Preservation of Suspicious Assets Connected with Corruption which was recently signed by the President on the same subject-matter and which in the opinion of Ogunlola, raises a lot of constitutional and due process questions.

    The bill had also scaled through Second reading in the Senate awaiting consideration by Committee of the Whole.

    It was however gathered that being similar, the House version will be transmitted to the Senate for concurrence in order to fast track its passage and transmission to the President for his assent.

     

  • Court orders forfeiture of Diezani’s N325.4m land

    A Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government a parcel of land in Lekki, Lagos State, linked to a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke.

    Justice Babs Kuewumi made the order following an ex-parte application by Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) counsel, Mr. Anslem Ozioko.

    Joined as defendants in the ex-parte applications were Diezani, one Mr. Donald Amamgbo and a firm, Mez Group LLC.

    The land, valued at N325.4 million, is designated as Plot 13, Block II, Oniru Chieftaincy Private Family Estate.

    Ozioko told the judge that the land was suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of crime.

    Justice Kuewumi also directed the anti-graft agency to publish the temporary forfeiture order in a national daily to put interested parties on notice.

    He adjourned till July 14, for anyone interested in the property to appear before him to show cause why the land should not be permanently forfeited.

    The EFCC is seeking an order of the court to appoint “a competent person(s) or firm to manage the assets/property named and described in the schedule to this application”.

    An EFCC investigator, Abdulrasheed Bawa, said the anti-graft agency stumbled on the documents of the land sometime in 2016 while executing a search on the office of Amamgbo, an ally of the ex-petroleum minister.

    Bawa said the anti-graft agency also recovered from Amamgbo’s office an undated report titled, “Highly Confidential Attorney Work Product August Report,” among others.

    He added: “The report contained a list of 18 companies and several properties located in the United Kingdom, Nigeria and the United States of America.

    “During the course of his interview, Mr. Donald Chidi Amamgbo told us that he registered the 18 companies to assist Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke in holding titles of her properties and that all the properties belong to her.”

     

     

     

  • Ex-NDDC director’s ally kicks against forfeiture of N800m Lekki property

    Mr Francis Momoh, who was accused of paying multiple kickbacks to former Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) Executive Director of Projects Mr. Tuoyo Omatsuli, has urged the Federal High Court in Lagos to lift the forfeiture order placed on his Lekki properties.

    He said the properties do not belong to Omatsuli as claimed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Chuka Obiozor had on May 17 ordered the temporary forfeiture of four properties in Lekki allegedly belonging to Omatsuli following EFCC’s ex parte application.

    The commission said the properties, valued at N846.03million, was reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.

    An EFCC operative, Adamu Yusuf, said Omatsuli allegedly received a bribe of N3,645,000,000 from a consultant to the NDDC, Starline Consultancy Services Limited.

    He said the firm was engaged to help NDDC recover its statutory three per cent annual budgets of oil and gas producing companies in the Niger Delta.

    Yusuf said it was agreed that Starline Consultancy Services would be paid 10 per cent commission on the total funds recovered.

    According to the operative, Starline Consultancy Services eventually succeeded in the job and was paid N10,218,019,060.59 as its 10 per cent commission between August 22, 2014 and June 25, 2015.

    Yusuf said: “Omatsuli agreed and received kickbacks to the tune of N3,645,000,000.000 from  Starline Consultancy Services Limited through Building Associates Limited, whose alter ego is Francis Momoh.”

    The anti-graft agency presented a table showing that Omatsuli allegedly received kickbacks 11 times from Starline Consultancy Services between August 28, 2014 and September 8, 2015.

    Justice Obizor had ordered interested parties to show cause as to why the properties should not be permanently forfeited.

    But Momoh, in an application filed through his lawyer Norrison Quakers (SAN), sought an order discharging the interim order of forfeiture on two of the properties.

    He prayed for an order directing the EFCC to remove any restrictions imposed on the properties, as well as an order restraining the commission from dealing in them in any manner.

    Momoh also prayed for an order directing the EFCC to render account of the rents and any monies collected from the time the order of forfeiture was granted until it is discharged.

    Momoh said the properties belong to him and Don Parker Properties Ltd, where he is a director, and that they were lawfully and legitimately acquired.

    “There is no reasonable basis to believe them to be proceeds of unlawful activity.

    “The order attaching the properties was obtained in breach of the interested parties’ fundamental right to fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

    “The order constitutes a breach of the applicants’ constitutional right to acquire and own properties within Nigeria.

    “The applicant/respondent (EFCC) not being the owner of the properties does not have the power to manager and control them.

    “The applicant/respondent at all material times knew that the interested parties are the owners of the properties but came before this Honourable Court in the guise that the owners are unknown.”

    Yesterday, EFCC lawyer Ekene Iheanacho said he needed time to respond to the applications filed by all the interested parties.

    Justice Obiozor adjourned until August 1 for hearing.

  • Court orders interim forfeiture of Patience Jonathan’s Abuja property

    AN Abuja Federal High Court has ordered the interim forfeiture of two buildings owned by former First Lady, Patience Jonathan.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, in a ruling yesterday, said the interim order granted based on an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), shall last for 45 days.

    The judge added that this is subject to renewal upon application by the EFCC.

    The buildings are identified as: Plot No: 1960 Cadastral Zone A05, Maitama District and 1758 Cadastral Zone A00 Business District.

    They presently serve as the headquarters of two groups – A. Aruera Reachout Foundation/Women for Change and Development Initiative – linked with the ex-first lady.

    The judge also restrained the owners of the property from selling or mortgaging them while the forfeiture order lasts.

    Justice Dimgba said the orders were necessary to enable the EFCC conduct its investigation on the property.

    The judge said the applicant should, at the end of its investigation, file charges where the allegations against the respondents are established.

    He said: “I hereby accordingly grant reliefs 1 and 2 sought.  Relief 3 is refused, because it is not supported by the grounds of the application and thus unnecessary in the circumstances of the application.”

    The two reliefs granted are:

    *an order of interim attachment / forfeiture of the asset and property set out in the schedule attached herein. (Plot No. 1960 Cadastral Zone A05, Maitama District, Abuja; and Plot No. 1350, Cadastral Zone A00, Abuja); and

    *an order stopping any disposal, conveyance, mortgage, lease, sale or alienation or otherwise of the property/asset described in the schedule herein.

    The third relief refused by the court related to EFCC’s request for permission to appoint either a firm or individuals to manage the property.

    The judge added: “The order of court granting the reliefs shall last only for a period of 45 days within which the applicant must conclude their investigation and file necessary criminal charges where investigation reveals the commission of a crime.

    “The applicant is at liberty to apply for a renewal of the order on cause, provided that such an application to be valid is made before the expiry of the 45 days validity period granted by the court.

    “Given the highly contentious nature of this application, I further order that where the applicant wishes to physically access the attached properties in execution of the order herein made, the applicant with the representatives of the respondent, shall take an inventory of all the contents and fixtures of the properties and shall file a report/result of such inventory to this court.”

    The judge dismissed the respondent’s objection to the suit.

    In dismissing the objection, the judge rejected the respondent’s argument that the suit was not properly commenced and that it was an abuse of court process.

    Lawyer to the respondent, Mike Ozekhome (SAN), while reacting to the court’s decision, said by the judgment, his client has lost nothing.

    “We did not lose, we won. What the EFCC wanted was for the property in dispute attached and forfeited to the government but the court refused and instead gave them 45 days to further investigate and prosecute, if they so wish with liberty to apply for renewal.

    “That is actually victory for us as the property was not forfeited,” Ozekhome said.

  • Fed Govt seeks forfeiture of Ekweremadu’s 22 properties

    The Federal Government has applied to the Federal High Court in Abuja for an order of temporary forfeiture of about 22 properties allegedly owned by Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu in Abuja, London, the United States and Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

    In the ex-parte application filed on yesterday by the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property (SPIPRPP), Ekweremadu is accused of breaching the Code of Conduct for public officers by allegedly failing to declare about 22 properties in his last assets declaration form.

    The application filed pursuant to Sections 330 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act; 8 of the Recovery of Public Property (Special Provisions) Act and Section 44 (2)(k) of the Constitution, seeks mainly an order for interim forfeiture of the properties to the Federal Government.

    The ex-parte application was filed for the SPIPRPP by Festus Keyamo (SAN). It prays the court for an order “temporarily attaching/forfeiting the properties listed in Schedule B hereunder to the Federal Government of Nigeria, pending the conclusion of further inquiry/investigation by the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property and/or possible arraignment of the respondent (Ekeremadu)”.

    The grounds relied on by the applicant include that the properties listed in Schedule A hereunder were the properties declared by the Respondent in his Assets Declaration Form at the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).

    It stated that investigation/inquiries have revealed that the properties listed in Schedule B also belong to the respondent and so belonged to him when he declared his assets in Schedule A.

    The applicant added that the properties listed in Schedule B were not declared in Ekweremadu’s assets declaration form. It added that preliminary investigation by the applicant reveals that a prima facie case of a breach of code of conduct for public officers had been made out against the respondent.

    But Ekweremadu, in a statement, defended his integrity.

    According to him, there is no asset to forfeit to the government.

    He said the filing of a motion for the recovery of his assets was part of the politics of the 2019 general election.

    He said in the statement by his Media Adviser Uche Anichukwu: “The attention of the Office of the Deputy President of the Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, has been drawn to a motion ex-parte filed by Festus Keyamo Chambers on behalf of the so-called Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property for an order to temporarily forfeit assets it claimed the senator did not declare with the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB.

    “Senator Ekweremadu, however, wishes to state unequivocally that he declared all his assets with the Code of Conduct Bureau as required by law.

    “The so-called panel sought and obtained his Assets Declaration Forms, but could not look at them since it is clearly out on a vendetta and smear campaign championed by Mr. Okoi Obono-Obla.

    “This is clearly part of the politics of 2019, and is further exposing those who colluded with the dismissed former Chief Judge of Enugu State, Justice Innocent Umezulike and his cronies to steal and doctor his will.

    “The Senator has, nevertheless, briefed his lawyers and will meet the panel in court.

    “Again, Senator Ekweremadu wishes to assure all his supporters and well-wishers that there is nothing to worry about. “Like others, this too shall pass.”

    Those in Abuja
    •No. 11, Evans Enwerem Street, Apo Legislative Quarters, Apo, Abuja.
    •Plot 2633 Kyami, Abuja.
    •Housing Estate (Plot 1106 CRD, Cadastral Zone 07-07, Lugbe, Abuja.
    •Plot 2782 Asokoro Extension, Abuja.
    •Houses at Citi Park Estate, Gwagwalada, Abuja.
    •Plot 1474 Cadastral Zone BD6, Mabushi, Abuja.
    •Congress Court, Abuja.
    •Flat 1, Block D25, Athletics Street, (24th Street) Games Village, Abuja.
    •Plot 66, 64 Crescent, Gwarimpa Estate, Abuja.
    Those in London
    •Flat 4 Varsity Court, Harmer Street, WIH 4NW, London.
    •52 Ayleston Avenue, NW6 7AB, London.
    In Dubai:
    •Room 1903, The Address Hotel, Downtown Dubai.
    •The Address Boulevard, 3901, Dubai
    •2 Flats of Burij Side Boulevard (the signature), Dubai
    •Emirate Gardens Apartment No. EGG1/1/114, Dubai.
    •Emirate Gardens Apartment No. EGG1/115, Dubai.
    •Apartment No. DFB/12/B 1204, Park Towers, Dubai.
    •Flat 3604, MAG214, Dubai.
    •Villa No 148, Maeen 1, The Lakes Emirates Hills, Dubai.
    4) In USA:
    •4507 Stella Street, Bellavida Estate Kissime, Florida, USA.
    •2747 Club Cortile Circle, Kissime, Florida, USA.
    •2763 Club Cortile Circle, Kissime, Florida, USA
    The Fed Govt added listed the properties declared by Ekweremadu in his assets declaration form of June 5, 2015, as contained in Schedule A to its application to include:
    •5 Bedroom Duplex & Boys Quarters, House A40 Apo Quarters, Apo, Abuja (purportedly acquired with a loan of N13.5 Million from Bank PHB);
    •10 Bedroom House with Guest Chalet & Boy Quarters, 2 Jim Nwobodo Street, Apo, Abuja (purportedly acquired with a mortgage loan of N412, 200, 000.00 from Aso Savings & Loan);
    •7 Bedroom House with Pent House & Boy quarters, Plot 147A Mabushi, Abuja (purportedly valued at N3, 471, 922.1 acquired with salaries & allowances);
    •2 RM Apartment, MAG 214 Dubai (purportedly bought for $ 50,000.00);
    •4 Bedroom Town House, The Lake Dubai (purportedly bought for $20,000.00);
    •4 RM Town House, Florida (he claims he bought this House from a loan of $155,000.00 gotten from PHB)
    •Plots 2 & 10, Republic Layout, Enugu (undeveloped land, purportedly valued at N4 Million);
    •Plot 1518, Maitama Extension, Abuja undeveloped land (purportedly valued at N10 Million);
    •Plot 2882, Asokoro Extension, Abuja (purportedly valued at N13 Million);
    •2 RM Apartment, Burjside Boulevard, Dubai, UAE (he claims he bought it for $250,000.00);
    •One Room Apartment, Emirate Garden, Dubai, UAE (He claims he bought it for $60,000.00);
    •Park Tower, Dubai, UAE (He claims he bought it for $250,000.00);
    •3 Room Town House (2), Club Corticle, Orlando, USA (he claims he bought this property for $200,000.00);
    •4 Room House, Plot 1496 AI Thannyah, Fourth, Dubai, UAE (he claims he bought this property for $250,000.00);
    •4 Bedroom Terrace House, Games Village;
    •6 Bedroom Storey House & Boys Quarters, Amachara MPU, Enugu;
    •4 Bedroom House and Boy Quarters, Federal Housing Estate, Enugu;
    •3000 Square Meters of undeveloped land at Amachara, MPU, Enugu;
    •5 Hectares of land, Tutu District, Abuja.
    The government also gave details of Ekweremadu’s investments in and outside the country to include:
    •5, 100,000 – Citi Park Luxury Hotels Ltd (purportedly valued at N350 Million);
    •8, 000, 000 – Prime & Power Media Ltd ((purportedly valued at N30 Million);
    •300,000,000 – Bety Air Ltd ((purportedly valued at N5 Million);
    •40, 000 – Prime & Power Konsult Ltd ((purportedly valued at N42 Million);
    •50,000 – Power Properties Ltd (purportedly valued at N50 Million);
    •70,000 – Spider Construction Ltd (purportedly valued at N35 Million).
    In his assets declaration form on June 1, 2007, Ekweremadu was said to have declared the properties and investments listed below:
    •4 Bedroom Terrace House, Games Village, Abuja
    •A Storey Building at Amachara (MPU) (Country home)
    •A Storey Building & Boy Quarters with Boys Quarters at Federal Housing, Enugu;
    •Apo Legislative Quarters, Apo, Abuja;
    •2644.60 Square meters of undeveloped Land at Asokoro, Abuja;
    •1000.577 Square meters, Kurubuma Layout, Abuja
    •3000 Square meters, Amachara MPU.
    •40, 000 – Prime & Power Konsult Ltd (purportedly valued at N40 Million);
    •50,000 – Prime Properties Ltd (purportedly valued at N50 Million);
    •70,000 – Spider Construction Ltd (purportedly valued at N36 Million)

  • Patience Jonathan kicks as EFCC seeks forfeiture of $8.4m, N9.1bn

    Patience Jonathan kicks as EFCC seeks forfeiture of $8.4m, N9.1bn

    Wife of former President Goodluck Jonathan Dame Patience, has asked the Federal High Court in Lagos to strike out an ex-parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seeking temporary forfeiture of her $8,435,788.84 and N7.35billion.

    She is praying the court for an order striking out the motion filed last December 13 on the grounds that it lacks jurisdiction to hear it.

    Mrs Jonathan said the motion was “a gross abuse of court process” because the issues were already pending before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    “The ex-parte originating summons filed by the EFCC amounts to forum shopping, thus an abuse of court process,” she said.

    Through her lawyer Mr Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN) and Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), Mrs Jonathan said the same application had earlier been filed by the EFCCC before Justice Mojisola Olatoregun of the court’s Lagos division, upon which it had obtained an ex-parte order.

    She said the same application was before Justice Nyako “over same parties to be affected by this same application.”

    The former first lady said EFCC allegedly failed to disclose the different suits and orders made prior to filing the application before Justice Olatoregun in Lagos.

    “The respondent is making great mockery of the judicial system and in extension this honourable court,” Mrs Jonathan said.

    In a supporting affidavit, a lawyer in Ozekhome’s chambers, Chimaobi Onuigbo, said EFCC knowing that its application had been challenged in Abuja, filed the one in Lagos.

    “The respondent upon knowing that their application had been challenged has come to this court to seek same relief over same accounts and parties that it has filed same application against in all the suits already mentioned,” he said.

    The respondents in EFCC’s motion are Mrs Jonathan, Globus Integrated Services, Finchley Top Homes Ltd, AM PM Global Network Ltd, Pagmat Oil and Gas Nig. Ltd, Magel Resort Ltd and Esther Oba.

    Onuigbo said their accounts had been frozen for over one year although they had not been charged with any offence by the EFCC.

    “They (Mrs Jonathan and others) have never been invited, investigated, charged or convicted by any court after same accounts have remained freezed for over one year and two months.

    “I know that the applicant will never disclose these gross abuse of the judicial process of this court to this honourable court as this same matter is pending before four different courts of concurrent jurisdiction,” the deponent said.

    EFCC lawyer Rotimi Oyedepo at the last hearing, informed Justice Olatoregun that he had filed an affidavit showing that all the monies EFCC is seeking to be forfeited were not subject of litigation in any court.

    He said the coast was clear to hear the forfeiture application, adding: “The application we filed in Lagos is for forfeiture and it is not pending before any court other in Nigeria.”

    EFCC said the funds, which it believes were diverted from Bayelsa State, were found in 15 bank accounts linked to Mrs. Jonathan.

    According to the commission, the funds were allegedly moved from Bayelsa State’s coffers when Mrs. Jonathan served as permanent secretary.

    The Commission alleged that she gained access to the funds by fraudulently assuming the identity of one Esther Oba as the signatory to the accounts.

    Hearing was stalled in the case yesterday due to Justice Olatoregun’s absence.

    The case was fixed for tomorrow for hearing.

  • Court orders forfeiture of Osborne Towers Flat 7B

    Court orders forfeiture of Osborne Towers Flat 7B

    The Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday ordered the final forfeiture of Flat 7B in Osborne Towers, Ikoyi, where large sums of money were found.

    Justice Saliu Saidu ruled on an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seeking the flat’s forfeiture.

    He dismissed an application by Union Bank Plc which claimed control of the flat, describing the bank as a “busy body”.

    Large sums of money were found in the flat, including $43,449,947, N23, 218,000 and £27,800, which were forfeited to the Federal Government last June 6.

    The EFCC accused former National Intelligence Agency (NIA) Director-General Ayodele Oke of fraudulently converting the agency’s funds and hiding them in the flat.

    It alleged that Oke’s wife, Folasade, used part of the funds to buy the flat through her company, Chobe Ventures Ltd.

    But, Union Bank said the flat was part of 16, Osborne Road, Ikoyi, belonging to former two-term governor of Bauchi State Alhaji Ahmadu Adamu Mu’azu.

    The bank said Muazu mortgaged the property to it by virtue of a tripartite deed of legal mortgage of November 1, 2011 as security for a loan granted to Tripple A Properties & Investment Ltd.

    It said the original title deed was vested in it, adding that the loan’s tenor had expired but it was not liquidated.

    Union Bank said it sold the flat to Chobe Ventures, owned by Oke’s wife, with an agreement that flat’s owner would observe several “covenants”, including payment of service charges, land use charge and levies, among others.

    The bank said Flat 7B forms part of several flats in the property and that it “cannot be severed from the other flats in the building”.

    The bank said forfeiting the flat would be detrimental to other occupants of the property as it would not be able to enforce the terms of its agreement with the owner.

    Ruling, Justice Saidu held that Chobe Ventures, which was the respondent, did not file anything to controvert the EFCC’s claim that the flat was acquired with proceeds of crime.

    “The interested party/applicant has no proprietary or legal interest in the flat having divested its interest by outright sale of the property to the respondent (Chobe Ventures).

    “I find the interested party/applicant’s motion to set aside and discharge the order of this court as unmeritorious and same is struck out,” Justice Saidu held.

    He agreed with the EFCC that the property was reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activity.

    Justice Saidu held: “The respondent, Chobe Ventures, refused and neglected to file anything in this case or to appear.

    “As stated earlier, the interested party/applicant does not have a right to the property. The Federal Government will take over the property and all the liabilities attached to it.

    “Based on the provision of Section 44 (2) (b) of the Constitution and Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud Act, I hereby order the final forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria of the property known as Flat 7B, 16 Osborne Road, Ikoyi, acquired in the name of Chobe Ventures.”

  • Ikoyi cash haul: Bank kicks as EFCC seeks forfeiture of Flat 7B

    Ikoyi cash haul: Bank kicks as EFCC seeks forfeiture of Flat 7B

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) yesterday urged the Federal High Court in Lagos to order the forfeiture of Flat 7B in Osborne Towers, Ikoyi to the Federal Government.

    Its lawyer, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, prayed the court to refuse an application by Union Bank of Nigeria Plc which seeks to discharge an interim order forfeiting the flat.

    He said the bank’s application was designed to scuttle the forfeiture hearing and was in bad faith.

    Oyedepo said since the bank had admitted selling the flat to Chobe Ventures Ltd, it would amount to eating its cake and having it by asking the court not to order the flat’s forfeiture.

    Large sums of money were found in flat, including $43,449,947, N23, 218,000 and £27,800, which were forfeited to the Federal Government last June 6.

    EFCC accused former National Intelligence Agency (NIA) Director-General Ayodele Oke of fraudulently converting the agency’s funds and hiding them in the flat.

    It alleged that Oke’s wife, Folasade, used part of the funds to buy the flat.

    The court, last November 9, ordered the flat’s temporary forfeiture to the Federal Government.

    Justice Saliu Saidu ruled that it would be permanently forfeited if no one turned up to justify ownership within 14 days.

    Union Bank, through its lawyer Chief Ajibola Aribisala (SAN), filed applications praying the court not to order the flat’s final forfeiture.

    In a supporting affidavit, the bank said the flat was part of 16, Osborne Road, Ikoyi, belonging to former two-term governor of Bauchi State Alhaji Ahmadu Adamu Mu’azu.

    The bank said Muazu mortgaged the property to it by virtue of a tripartite deed of legal mortgage of November 1, 2011.

    “The property was mortgaged to United Bank to secure a loan granted to Tripple A Properties & Investment Ltd by Union Bank,” the bank said.

    It said the original title deed was vested in it, adding that the loan’s tenor had expired but it was not liquidated.

    Union Bank said it sold the flat to Chobe Ventures, owned by Oke’s wife, with an agreement that flat’s owner would observe several “covenants”, including payment of service charges, land use charge and levies, among others.

    The bank said Flat 7B forms part of several flats and that it “cannot be severed from the other flats in the building”.

    It added non-observance of any of the terms of the agreement would “severely affect the other users of the property”.

    Union Bank said Chobe Ventures’ act of allowing “strangers” to stash illegally money in the flat violated their agreement, which entitles the bank to nullify the flat’s sale.

    “The title of Chobe Ventures has not yet been registered and the legal title of the property still resides in Union Bank,” it said.

    Among others, the bank said granting the order of final forfeiture would prevent it from enforcing the terms of the agreement on which the flat sale was based.

    But, Oyedepo said based on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, any property that is reasonably suspected to be a proceed of crime is liable to be forfeited.

    “I urged your Lordship to grant this application, particularly in view of the fact that Chobe Ventures who allegedly used the proceeds of unlawful activity to acquire the property in issue did not oppose this application or controvert the facts,” Oyedepo said.

    Justice Saidu adjourned till January 19 for ruling.