Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja granted Diezani Alison-Madueke’s application to amend her suit challenging the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) order for the final forfeiture of her seized assets.
The court approved the amendment after Diezani’s lawyer, Godwin Inyinbor, moved the motion, and the EFCC, represented by Divine Oguru, offered no objection.
Justice Ekwo allowed five days for the filing and service of the amended processes, giving the EFCC 14 days to respond. The case was adjourned to March 17 for further mention. This hearing followed a previous November 21, 2024, scheduling for the motion to amend.
Diezani’s Claims:
Diezani’s original suit challenged the EFCC’s public notice regarding the public sale of her assets, arguing that the forfeiture orders were issued without jurisdiction and violated her right to a fair hearing, as guaranteed by Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution. She claimed that she was not served with charge sheets, proof of evidence, or summonses related to pending criminal charges and that the courts were misled by the suppression or non-disclosure of material facts in the applications leading to the forfeiture orders. She also claimed that she was not allowed to express her right to a fair hearing before the order was made.
EFCC’s Counter-Arguments:
In a counter-affidavit, EFCC detective Rufus Zaki refuted Diezani’s claims. He stated that the forfeiture orders were issued after due process, including public notices inviting objections and that Diezani was represented in some of the proceedings leading to the forfeiture orders. He clarified that the orders were made in 2017 and were not overturned on appeal and that Diezani faces criminal charges (FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018) related to conspiracy, corruption, and money laundering. Thus, the assets had already been disposed of according to legal procedures.
Background Information:
The EFCC, under former chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa, had recovered $153 million and over 80 properties from Diezani, who served as Minister of Petroleum between 2010 and 2015. She is currently residing in the United Kingdom. This asset forfeiture case is separate from another suit where she seeks N100 billion in compensation for alleged libelous publications by the EFCC.
Conclusion:
The amendment granted by the court allows Diezani to refine her arguments against the asset forfeiture. The upcoming March 17 hearing will be crucial in determining the validity of the EFCC’s actions and the ultimate fate of the seized assets. The case highlights the ongoing legal battle surrounding the recovery of allegedly ill-gotten gains from public officials and underscores the complexities of navigating asset forfeiture proceedings within the Nigerian legal system.
