Court Grants Diezani’s Request to Challenge Forfeiture Order

A court has ruled in favor of former minister Diezani Alison-Madueke, allowing her to challenge the forfeiture order on her assets.

Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja has approved a request from former Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke to modify her lawsuit contesting the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) order for final forfeiture of her confiscated assets.

Justice Ekwo approved the request after Diezani’s lawyer, Godwin Inyinbor, filed the motion and Divine Oguru, representing the EFCC, raised no objections.

During the day’s proceedings, Inyinbor informed the court that they had already submitted a motion to amend their originating process and that the defendant had been properly served.

Oguru did not object to the ex-minister’s request to amend her lawsuit, and Justice Ekwo approved it as requested.

The judge allowed Diezani five days to file and deliver the amended documents, and granted the EFCC 14 days from receiving them to provide a response.

The issue was then postponed to March 17 for additional discussion.

On November 21, 2024, Justice Ekwo scheduled today’s date for the hearing on the motion to amend the originating process.

The former minister had filed a lawsuit against the anti-corruption agency, naming it as the only respondent.

Alison-Madueke had requested an extension of the deadline to apply for court permission to seek an order that would nullify the EFCC’s public notice regarding a proposed sale of her property.

In the motion dated and filed by her lawyer on January 6, 2023, the former minister requested five orders from the court.

The former minister claimed that the various orders were made without proper authority and stated they “should be nullified ex debito justitiae,” meaning as a matter of justice.

She claimed that she was not afforded a fair hearing throughout the entire proceedings leading to the orders.

She stated that the different court orders favoring the respondent, which led to their public notice, violated the applicant’s right to a fair hearing as guaranteed by Section 36 (1) of the amended 1999 Constitution and other similar constitutional provisions.

She contended that she had not been served with the charge sheet or any evidence related to the charges, nor had she received any other summons concerning the criminal allegations pending against her in court.

She additionally contended that the courts were misled into issuing several final forfeiture orders against her assets due to the suppression or non-disclosure of essential information.

The various applications that led the courts to issue a final forfeiture order against the applicant were based on significant misstatements, misrepresentations, failure to disclose information, concealment, and suppression of important facts.

“The court has the authority to annul such orders ex debito justitiae, since a void order is essentially treated as if it never existed.”

The orders were issued without considering the applicant’s constitutional rights to a fair hearing and property.

She stated, among other reasons, “The applicant was never served with the court processes in any of the proceedings that resulted in the order of final forfeiture.”

In a counter-affidavit sworn by the EFCC, Detective Rufus Zaki from the commission asked the court to reject her application.

Zaki, part of the team that investigated a case involving criminal conspiracy, official corruption, and money laundering against the former minister and others connected to it, stated that their investigation clearly revealed her involvement in certain criminal activities.

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

He stated, “We rely on the charge FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018 dated November 14th, 2018, which was filed before this honorable court and is also attached as Exhibit C in the applicant’s affidavit.”

The EFCC official stated that many of the statements in Alison-Madueke’s lawsuit were false.

He stated that, contrary to her deposition in the affidavit supporting the suit, most of the cases resulting in the final forfeiture of the contested property were actions in rem. These cases were heard at different times and decided by this honorable court.

He mentioned that the courts instructed the commission to publish a notice in a newspaper, inviting parties to explain why the specified property should not be confiscated by the federal government prior to finalizing any orders.

Zaki claimed that a certain Nnamdi Awa Kalu acted on behalf of the former minister in response to one of the forfeiture applications.

“We respectfully depend on the decision made by Hon. Justice I.LN. Oweibo dated September 10, 2019, as demonstrated in Exhibit C of the applicant’s affidavit,” he stated.

The officer stated that, in contrast to her claims, the court ordered the final forfeiture of the assets involved in this application back in 2017. This decision has neither been overturned nor set aside on appeal.

He stated that the properties were disposed of following due legal process.

The anti-corruption agency had scheduled a public auction of assets seized as proceeds of crime, which courts ordered to be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government. This auction began on January 9, 2023, and included properties believed to belong to Alison-Madueke among the items up for sale.

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

It was alleged that she fled to the United Kingdom and stayed there after leaving her position as petroleum minister, a role she served in from 2010 to 2015 during the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

The lawsuit concerning the assets is separate from another case she filed, in which she seeks N100 billion in compensation for what she claims are a series of defamatory publications by the EFCC against her.