In a land ownership dispute between Jona Brothers Construction Limited and one Chief Michael Adeojo (Chairman of Elizade Motors), attorney Alexander Oketa, based in Abuja, has brought Mr. Ola Olukoyede, the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, or EFCC, before a Federal Capital Territory High Court.
Oketa brought the lawsuit on behalf of Jona Brothers, his clients. The Attorney-General of the Federation, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Inspector-General of Police, IGP Kayode Egbetokun, and a few EFCC officers are respondents in the lawsuit.
In his request, the court should mandate that the respondents pay the plaintiffs N500 million in general damages.
Last week, Oketa petitioned the chairman of the EFCC to summon his personnel who were reportedly engaged in land-grabbing in Abuja.
The property located at Plot 680-689, Cadastral Zone, B06 Mabushi, Abuja, has been the focus of controversy. A Police Investigation Report and multiple court rulings have determined that Jona Brothers is the rightful owner of the land, but the EFCC allegedly tampered with it later and claimed it belonged to Adeojo.
Then, using an ex-perte order of temporary forfeiture, EFCC agents raided the property last Thursday and sealed it off, threatening to arrest anyone who approached it.
In a Fundamental Rights Enforcement suit filed at the High Court of the FCT on behalf of Jona Brothers Construction Limited, Bullion Properties Limited, Oyenbueke Uche Vincent and John Oyih, Oketa is seeking an order directing the EFCC to immediately unseal the property and allow his clients unrestrained access to it.
The suit is also seeking an order to declare the invasion and threats to arrest and detain the owners of the land by the EFCC as “ultra vires; arbitrary; prejudicial; without precedent; unprocedural; unconstitutional; subversion of the rule of law and due administration of justice; subversion of the independence, authority and integrity of the judiciary; and a violation of the Applicants fundamental rights to personal liberty, fair hearing, freedom to own movable and immovable property guaranteed under sections 35, 36, 43 & 44 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)”.
“The facts of this suit as it relates to the Applicants is a simple land dispute and attempts by the EFCC officials to retake possession of the land and hand same to the Applicants’ defeated opponent, Chief Michael Adeojo (Owner of Elizade Motors), whom the EFCC gave verdict as the owner of the land, contrary to the verdicts of three (3) judgements and rulings of three (3) Justices of the FCT High Court Abuja, having exclusive jurisdiction over land matters,” Oketa posited.
He gave the breakdown of the judgements and rulings of the courts to include, “Judgement of His Lordship, Justice Ibrahim Mohammed, in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/42/2023, prohibiting the EFCC and entity acting on its behalf from Plot 680-689.
READ ALSO: Fubara Writes Pro-Wike Lawmakers Again, Sets New Date for Budget Presentation
“Judgement of Hon. Justice S.U. Bature, Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/05/2020, declaring the Applicants Owners of the land. Ruling of Hon. Justice Binta Mohamed, in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/806/2022, dismissing Chief Michael Adeojo’s quest to set aside the judgement; and Oder of Hon. Justice Olajuwon of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Suit No. FCT/ABJ/CS/779/2023, Ordering the EFCC to maintain status quo.”
The lawyer contended that “the Respondents took laws into their hands and recklessly carried out the aforementioned illegal acts, without the approval of the enforcement unit of the Federal High Court, Abuja, where they covertly obtained the exparte Order.
“The Respondents violated the sanctity of the Courts and the Applicants’ rights to liberty, fair hearing, acquire and own properties, as enshrined in the Sections 35, 43, and 44 of the 1999 Constitution and Articles 6 and 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right, hence this suit”.
Oketa is also seeking an order directing the 8th Respondent (the IGP) to accord the Applicants all necessary protection and security needed for their peaceful possession of the said property.
Meanwhile, no date has been fixed for hearing of the suit.
