Forfeiture of Assets: Absence of Judge stalls hearing of Diezani’s petition against EFCC

The hearing of a lawsuit filed by the former minister of petroleum resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, challenging the orders obtained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, for the final forfeiture of her confiscated assets, was postponed by a Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday.

Due to Justice Inyang Ekwo, the presiding judge, being absent, the case, which was scheduled to be heard on cause list number 15, was unable to move further.

The court then set Dec. 7 for the lawsuit with the following markings: FHC/ABJ/CS/21/23 to be heard.

According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), Justice Ekwo set the case’s hearing date for Monday on June 21 after the attorneys for the EFCC and Alison-Madueke both formalized their courtroom procedures.

According to NAN, the anti-corruption organization had intended to hold a public auction of all the assets that had been seized as the result of criminal activity and were mandated by the courts to be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

On January 9, an auction was held for the confiscated assets, which was thought to include Diezani’s property.

Alison-Madueke had been held responsible for the recovery of $153 million and over 80 pieces of property, according to the EFCC’s immediate past chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa.

She was said to have fled to the UK and stayed there after leaving her position as petroleum minister, which she held from 2010 to 2015 while serving the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

However, the ex-minister requested in her lawsuit an extension of time to seek permission to ask the court to strike aside the EFCC’s public notice it had issued to conduct a public sale on her property.

The former minister asked the court for five directions in the request dated and submitted on January 6 with the case number FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023 by her attorney, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN.

The EFCC is the only respondent in the case, despite the fact that Alison-Madueke is the applicant.

The former minister said that there was no legal basis for the various orders, and he claimed that they “ought to be set aside ex debito justitiae.”

She claimed that throughout the entire process leading up to the orders, she was not given a fair hearing.

“The various court orders issued in favour of the respondent and upon which the respondent issued the public notice were issued in breach of the applicant’s right to fair hearing as guaranteed by Section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, as altered, and other similar constitutional provisions,” she said.

Dieziani argued that she was neither served with the charge sheet and proof of evidence in any of the charge nor any other summons howsoever and whatsoever in respect of the criminal charges pending against her before the court.

She further argued that the courts were misled into making several of the final forfeiture orders against her assets through suppression or non-disclosure of material facts.

“The several applications upon which the courts made the final order of forfeiture against the applicant were obtained upon gross misstatements, misrepresentations, non-disclosure, concealment and suppression of material facts.

”This honourable court has the power to set-aside the same ex debito justitiae, as a void order is as good as if it was never made at all.

“The orders were made without recourse to the constitutional right to fair hearing and right to property accorded the applicant by the constitution.

“The applicant was never served with the processes of court in all the proceedings that led to the order of final forfeiture,” she said, among other grounds given.
But the EFCC, in a counter affidavit deposed to by Rufai Zaki, a detective with the Commission, urged the court to dismiss her application.

Zaki, who was a member of the team that investigated a case of criminal conspiracy, official corruption and money laundering against the ex-minister and some other persons involved in the case, said investigation had clearly shown that she was involved in some acts of criminality.

He said Alison-Madueke was therefore charged before the court in charge no: FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018.

“We hereby rely on the charge FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018 dated 14th November, 2018 filed before this honourable court and also attached as Exhibit C in the applicant’s affidavit,” he said.

The EFCC operative, who said he had seen the ex-minister’s motion, said most of the depositions were untrue.

He said contrary to her deposition in the affidavit in support, most of the cases which led to the final forfeiture of the contested property “were action in rem, same were heard at various times and determined by this honourable court.”

Zaki added that the courts had ordered the Commission to do a newspaper publication inviting parties to show cause why the said property should not be forfeited to the Federal Government, before final orders were made.

Daily Post