Connect with us

Society

Medicine After Death: Don’t Allow EFCC Sell My Property, Assets – Ex-Petroleum Minister, Diezani Urges Court

Published

on

A former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke, has approached a Federal High Court, Abuja to withdraw an order granted to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for final forfeiture of her seized assets.

In an originating motion, Alison-Madueke sought an order extending the time limit for seeking leave to apply to the court for an order to set aside the EFCC’s public notice to conduct a public sale on her property.

We had reported how Justice Mobolaji Olajuwon of the Federal High Court, Abuja ordered the final forfeiture of two properties and two cars belonging to Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke, to the Nigerian Government last October.

Alison-Madueke was Minister of Petroleum Resources under President Goodluck Jonathan.

Since the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari led-Federal Government took over the office in 2015, the former minister relocated to the United Kingdom.

The Nigerian government through the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seized all her properties declaring that it was acquired through illegal means.

The EFCC in Suit No. 1122/2021 and Suit No 1123/2021, filed before Justice Olajuwon sought an order of the court for the final forfeiture of the assets belonging to the former Minister to the federal government.

However, in the motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023, dated and filed Jan. 6 before Justice Inyang Ekwo by her lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, the ex-minister sought five orders from the court.

While Alison-Madueke is the applicant in the case, the EFCC is the sole respondent.

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 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 to conduct public sale of items contained in the public notice most of which court the interest of the applicant 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 claimed that she was not served with the charge sheet and proof of evidence in any of the charges, nor with any other summons in relation to the criminal charges pending against her before the court.

She also claimed that the courts were misled into issuing final forfeiture orders against her assets due to the 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 and this honourable 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.

But the EFCC, in a counter affidavit deposed to by Rufai Zaki, a detective with the commission, urged the court to dismiss Alison-Madueke’s application.

Zaki, a member of the team that investigated a case of criminal conspiracy, official corruption, and money laundering against the ex-minister and others involved in the case, stated that the investigation clearly demonstrated that she was involved in some criminal acts.

He said Alison-Madueke was therefore charged before the court in charge no: FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018.

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

The EFCC operative, who said he had seen the ex-minister’s motion, said most of the depositions were untrue.

He said contrary to her deposition in the affidavit in support, most of the cases which led to the final forfeiture of the contested property “were action in rem, same were heard at various times and determined by this honourable court.”

He said the courts differently ordered the commission to do a newspaper publication inviting parties to show cause why the said property should not be forfeited to the Federal Government, before final orders were made.

Zaki argued that one Nnamdi Awa Kalu represented the ex-minister in reaction to one of the forfeiture applications.

“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 said that the contrary to her, the final forfeiture of the assets which were subject of the present application was ordered by the court since 2017 and that this was not set aside or upturned on appeal.

Upon mentioning the matter on Monday, Alison-Madueke’s counsel, Oluchi Uche, told Justice Ekwo that they were just been served by the EFFC on Friday and they would need time to respond to the counter affidavit.

Farouk Abdullah, who appeared by the anti-graft agency, did not oppose and the judge adjourned the matter until May 8 for hearing.

 

Society

Oando Boss, Wale Tinubu Receives Award as Best Investor of the Year

Published

on

By

 

Jubril Adewale Tinubu, oil tycoon and GCE of leading oil and gas firm, OANDO, yesterday shone brilliantly like a well-cut diamond when he received the award for the New Telegraph Investor/Transaction of the Year 2024.

 

The oil guru with three decades of expectational performance in the oil sector was among other prominent Nigerians that went home with honours at the Oriental Hotels, venue of the ceremony.

 

The award, described as well- deserved, was presented to Tinubu for leading his team to successfully completing the acquisition of Agip Oil Company at $783 million.

 

The transaction, which was completed in August 2024, was described my many as a remarkable one the nation’s economy.

 

Tinubu is an intelligent, pragmatic and a genius who strikes when the iron is hottest.

 

Gifted with a knack to spot opportunity ahead of the crowd, Tinubu has in the last 30 years of unbroken entrepreneurial voyage positioned Oando among the best oil and gas company in the world.

He believes Nigeria offers limitless possibilities and opportunities, and holds high, at all times, the banner of hope.

 

Today, the business has not only earned him fame and wealth, but has also contributed in great measures to the economic development of Africa and beyond.

 

Other awardees on the night include Governor Babagana Zulum of Borno State won the Governor of the Year 2024; Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State received the Governor of the Year in Projects, while Governor Ahmed Aliyu of Sokoto State won Governor of the Year in Economy

 

 

Others are Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State; Osun State Governor, Senator Ademola Adeleke; Ekiti State Governor, Biodun Oyebanji; Group Chief Executive Officer of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL), Mr Mele Kyari, won the newspaper’s prestigious Man of the Year 2024, while the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Barrister Festus Keyamo (SAN), won Minister of the Year 2024 in Transformative Leadership.

Continue Reading

Society

The weaponization of justice and the injustice faced by Dan Etete – Jeremiah Perekeme 0woupele

Published

on

By

 

In the intricate corridors of global jurisprudence, the scales of justice often tip under the weight of political machinations and economic interests. The case of Dan Etete, Nigeria’s former Minister of Petroleum, epitomizes how legal systems can be manipulated, leading to profound personal and national injustices.

Dan Etete, appointed as Nigeria’s Minister of Petroleum Resources in 1995, played a pivotal role in introducing the marginal oil field regime and indigenous participation in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry. His contributions have however been beclouded by the controversy around the controversial OPL 245. This oil block, one of Africa’s richest, became the focus of a protracted legal battle involving major oil companies amid allegations of corruption. Etete’s involvement led to accusations that have marred his reputation and overshadowed his contributions to Nigeria’s oil sector.

In a landmark decision, an Italian court acquitted Eni, Shell, and associated individuals, including Etete, of corruption charges related to OPL 245. The court concluded that there was no case to answer, highlighting the absence of sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. This verdict underscores the complexities inherent in international legal proceedings, where accusations often outpace the evidence required for conviction.

Etete’s ordeal is not isolated. Globally, individuals have faced similar legal battles, where accusations are levied, with years spent in court, only to culminate in acquittals. These cases highlight systemic issues within legal frameworks that allow for the weaponization of justice, often driven by political or economic motivations.

The protracted legal saga of Amanda Knox serves as a poignant illustration of Italy’s judicial labyrinth. Knox, an American student, was accused of the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia. After initial convictions and subsequent acquittals, she was finally exonerated by Italy’s Supreme Court in 2015.

The case highlighted significant issues within the Italian legal system. Issues were raised around the handling of forensic evidence, media interference, and prosecutorial conduct. It also underscored the challenges of ensuring justice in a system where legal procedures can be as complex as the crimes themselves.

In the UK, the case of the Birmingham Six remains a stark reminder of the fallibility of justice systems. Six Irish men were wrongfully convicted in 1975 for pub bombings in Birmingham, based on coerced confessions and questionable forensic evidence. After 16 years of imprisonment, their convictions were quashed in 1991, revealing systemic flaws such as investigative misconduct and the suppression of evidence. This case prompted significant reforms in the UK’s criminal justice system, emphasizing the need for checks and balances to prevent miscarriages of justice.

The term “weaponization of justice” refers to the deliberate manipulation of legal systems to achieve objectives beyond the pursuit of truth and fairness. The weaponization of legal technicalities, whether through coerced confessions, mishandled evidence, or political interference, undermines the foundational principles of justice.

In Dan Etete’s case, the prolonged legal battles, despite eventual acquittal, suggest a misuse of judicial processes, leading to reputational damage. Despite his achievements that merit recognition, and most notably his discharge and acquittal in three jurisdictions – ITALY, UNITED KINGDOM, and Nigeria; he has remained the focal point of smear campaigns.

What does his discharge and acquittal really mean? It means that Dan Etete has been formally cleared of charges in a court of law. This means the court has found him not guilty of the charges brought against him. An acquittal signifies that there was insufficient evidence to prove the person committed the alleged offence, or was proven innocent. This means the accused is released from the legal process and is free to go. If he has been found to have done nothing wrong by the Nigerian Legal system, where the judiciary has come under scrutiny in recent times, is it being insinuated that the course of justice was perverted in those other jurisdictions?

In reflecting upon the Chief Dan Etete cases, it becomes evident that the pursuit of justice requires constant vigilance, systemic introspection, and unwavering commitment to fairness. Just as poverty can be weaponized to perpetuate societal inequities, legal ambiguities when exploited, lead to miscarriages of justice.

Moreover, they erode public trust in legal institutions, deter individuals from public service, and can have economic repercussions, especially in sectors as vital as oil and gas. Furthermore, they highlight the need for reforms to prevent the misuse of legal systems and to ensure that justice is truly blind.

Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) often find themselves under intense scrutiny due to their influential positions, making them susceptible to allegations of corruption. In several instances, PEPs have been wrongfully accused and, despite subsequent exoneration, have suffered significant reputational damage due to smear campaigns. Here are five notable cases from different countries:

Former President John Dramani Mahama was implicated in a bribery scandal involving Airbus SE, with allegations suggesting his involvement through his brother, Samuel Adam Mahama. These claims, lacking substantial evidence, were perceived as politically motivated to tarnish Mahama’s reputation and divert attention from governmental shortcomings. The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) eventually exonerated Mahama, but the smear campaign had already inflicted damage on his public image.

Adolphus Wabara, former President of the Nigerian Senate, faced allegations in 2005 of accepting a ₦55 million bribe to influence budget approvals. Despite his resignation and a prolonged 14-year legal battle, Wabara was acquitted in 2019 due to insufficient evidence.

Frederick Chiluba, Zambia’s second President, faced allegations of embezzling public funds after his tenure ended in 2002. Following a protracted legal process, Chiluba was acquitted of all charges in 2009. The court determined that the prosecution failed to provide compelling evidence linking him to the alleged crimes. This verdict underscored the challenges in distinguishing between political vendettas and genuine anti-corruption efforts.

Georgia Thompson, a Wisconsin state employee, was convicted in 2006 on federal corruption charges, accused of steering a state contract for political reasons. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned her conviction in 2007, citing a lack of evidence.

Former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia was accused of misusing funds related to the Zia Charitable Trust, leading to her conviction and imprisonment in 2018. In November 2024, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh acquitted Zia and all co-accused, citing a lack of credible evidence.

Nabil Sayadi, director of the European branch of the Global Relief Foundation, was accused of transferring funds to an Al-Qaeda financier, leading to his inclusion on international watch-lists and the freezing of his assets. In 2006, Belgian judges exonerated Sayadi, citing a lack of evidence linking him to terrorist activities.

These cases highlight the profound impact that unfounded corruption allegations and smear campaigns can have on PEPs, often resulting in lasting reputational harm even after legal exoneration.While many accusations are substantiated, there are notable instances where PEPs have been wrongfully accused and subsequently exonerated by the legal system.

Chief Dan Etete’s experience, like the ones already referenced, serves as a stark reminder of the potential for justice systems to be weaponized. It calls for introspection and reform to safeguard the principles of fairness and equity, ensuring that individuals are protected from undue legal persecutions driven by interests that have little to do with justice. This underscores the necessity for robust legal frameworks that ensure due process, protect individuals from politically motivated accusations, and uphold the integrity of judicial systems worldwide.

*** Jeremiah Perekeme Owoupele is a Niger Delta based lawyer.

Continue Reading

Society

Portable now in our custody – Ogun Police

Published

on

By

 

The Ogun State Police Command says Habeeb Okikiola, aka Portable, is now in its custody.

 

Omolola Odutola, the state public relations officer made the disclosure in a statement on Wednesday.

 

According to her, “The Ogun State Police Command wishes to inform the public that Habeeb Okikiola, also known as Portable, arrived at the State Criminal Investigation Department, Eleweran, Abeokuta, at exactly 13:23 hours today, February 19, 2025.

 

 

“His presence at the SCID is connected to an ongoing investigation. The command assures the public that due process will be followed in handling this matter, and updates will be provided as necessary.”

 

Portable was declared wanted for assault on some officials of the Ogun State Town Planning Agency who were carrying out enforcement on his property in the Ilogbo area of the state.

 

Details later…

Continue Reading

Trending