Court Grants Ex-Minister, Diezani’s Application On Forfeiture Order

Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja has approved an application submitted by former Minister of Petroleum, Diezani Alison-Madueke, to modify her lawsuit contesting the order obtained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for the final forfeiture of her confiscated assets.

The request was granted following the presentation of the motion by Diezani’s attorney, Godwin Inyinbor, with no opposition from the EFCC’s counsel, Divine Oguru.

During the proceedings, Inyinbor informed the court that a motion for the amendment of their originating process had already been filed and that the defendant had been properly served.

Oguru did not object to the ex-minister’s request to amend her lawsuit, leading Justice Ekwo to grant the request as submitted.

The judge instructed Diezani to file and serve the amended documents within five days and allowed the EFCC 14 days from the date of service to respond.

The case was subsequently adjourned until March 17 for further consideration.

Justice Ekwo had previously scheduled today for the hearing of the motion to amend the originating process on November 21, 2024.

The ex-minister had named the anti-graft agency as the sole respondent in her lawsuit.

Alison-Madueke sought an order to extend the timeframe for seeking permission to apply to the court for an order to annul the EFCC’s public notice regarding the sale of her property.

In the motion dated January 6, 2023, filed by her attorney, the former minister requested five specific orders from the court.

The former minister, who argued that the various orders were made without jurisdiction, said these “ought to be set aside ex debito justitiae.”

She said she was not given a fair hearing in all the proceedings leading to the orders.

“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.

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

She further argued that the courts were misled into making several 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.

“The court has the power to set aside 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.

EFCC’s Plea

In a counter-affidavit submitted by the EFCC, Rufus Zaki, a detective with the commission, requested the court to reject her application.

Zaki, who was part of the investigative team examining allegations of criminal conspiracy, official corruption, and money laundering involving the former minister and several other individuals, stated that the investigation had unequivocally demonstrated her involvement in various criminal activities.

He indicated that Alison-Madueke was subsequently charged in court under case number FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018.

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

An operative from the EFCC stated that many of the statements made in Alison-Madueke’s lawsuit were false.

He asserted that, contrary to her claims in the affidavit supporting the suit, the majority of the cases that resulted in the ultimate forfeiture of the disputed property were actions in rem, which were heard and resolved by this esteemed court at various times.

He further explained that the courts mandated the commission to publish a notice in a newspaper, inviting interested parties to present reasons why the property in question should not be forfeited to the federal government prior to the issuance of final orders.

Zaki contended that an individual named Nnamdi Awa Kalu represented the former minister in response to one of the forfeiture petitions.

“We humbly rely on the judgment of Hon. Justice I.LN. Oweibo dated 10th September 2019 shown in Exhibit C of the applicant’s affidavit,” he said.

The officer stated that, in contrast to her claims, the court had ordered the final forfeiture of the assets involved in the current application in 2017, and this decision was neither overturned nor annulled on appeal.

He asserted that the properties had been disposed of in accordance with legal procedures.

The anti-corruption agency had intended to hold a public auction for all assets seized as proceeds of crime, which the courts had mandated to be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government. This auction, which included properties believed to belong to Alison-Madueke, commenced on January 9, 2023.

Abdulrasheed Bawa, a former chairman of the EFCC, disclosed that $153 million and more than 80 properties had been recovered from the former minister.

She was reportedly able to flee to the United Kingdom and has remained there since leaving her position as the petroleum minister, a role she occupied from 2010 to 2015 during the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

The lawsuit concerning the assets is separate from another case she filed, seeking N100 billion in compensation for alleged defamatory publications made by the EFCC against her.