Former Petroleum Resources Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke has petitioned a federal high court in Abuja to prevent the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from auctioning off all of the properties that were taken from her.
In an amended application submitted by her attorney, Mike Ozekhome, before presiding judge Inyang Ekwo, Diezani also asked for an order directing the EFCC to collect from individuals (natural or corporate) to whom it had sold any of the properties.
She claimed that the EFCC had violated her fundamental right to a fair trial by holding a public auction of her assets.
The former minister contended that she was not issued with any charge or proof of evidence of any criminal action, nor was she served with a summons about any case pending before any court, even though the EFCC claimed that a final order of forfeiture had been made against her confiscated properties.
The petitioner claimed that by lying and hiding facts, the anti-graft agency had obtained forfeiture orders against her.
“In many cases, the final forfeiture orders were made against properties which affected the applicant’s interest; the courts were misled into making the final order of forfeiture against the applicant, based on suppression or non-disclosure of material facts,” the application reads.
“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, and thus the 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.”
Diezani further claimed that the several forfeiture orders issued by the court lacked the necessary authority and that she was not able to use her constitutional right to a fair trial.
The former minister maintained that the EFCC knew she had left the nation in 2015 to receive medical treatment, but that she was never served with the pertinent court proceedings that resulted in the orders for the ultimate confiscation of her assets.
“The applicant did not have any access to newspapers circulating within Nigeria during this period as she was not in Nigeria at all material times relevant to this suit,” the application stated.
“The courts, in granting the final order of forfeiture in a matter that is said to flow from criminal activities and which are criminal in nature, and without any conviction of the applicant, granted the order of final forfeiture on minimum proof based on the civil standards of preponderance of evidence or balance of probability, instead of the strict proof applicable in criminal trials or civil proceedings where there is an allegation of crime.
“Only a court of law can declare an act as constituting unlawful activities, and there was no such order that had declared the alleged conduct of the applicant to be unlawful.
“A mere allegation by the respondent (EFCC) that the act or action of the applicant constituted unlawful activities will not suffice in the circumstance.”
She told the court that she has three suits against the EFCC pending before courts in Lagos, contending that “since the forfeiture orders are being challenged, no sale can validly take place as such sale would be rendered nugatory.”
Meanwhile, the EFCC has filed a counter-affidavit challenging the competence of Diezani’s application.
The affidavit, deposed to by Oyakhilome Ekienabor, a litigation officer, refuted several claims made by the applicant.
Ekienabor said the forfeiture orders were not issued in violation of the applicant’s rights to a fair hearing, noting that the properties were disposed of following due process.
“The final forfeiture orders pursuant to which the sale of the properties was conducted are still in force and have not been set aside,” he added.
“The forfeited properties were disposed of in accordance with the due process of law.”
He further stated Diezani was represented during one of the proceedings, but the court ultimately issued the final forfeiture orders after considering submissions made by her counsel.
READ MORE: Shettima Admits: APC Performed Woefully in Southern Kaduna
At the resumed proceeding in the matter on Monday, Godwin Iyibor, who appeared for the applicant, requested time to file his response to EFCC’s counter-affidavit, which he said was served on him on March 14.
The judge emphasised the need to expedite the case, considering that it was filed in 2023.
The EFCC’s counsel, Divine Oguru, apologised for the delay in responding and assured the court of readiness at the next hearing.
“We will be ready to go on in the next adjourned date, my lord,” he said.
The judge adjourned the matter to March 27 for a hearing.
