When it rains, it pours; and so it seems for Nigeria’s Deputy Senate President and senator, Ike Ekweremadu, who is a British jail over an alleged organ harvest case, and at home the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Friday got the go-ahead of a Federal High Court in Abuja to publish an order of interim forfeiture of 40 landed properties belonging to him.
But civil rights advocacy group, the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA), has faulted the move by the EFCC which culminated in the interim assets forfeiture order, describing it as malicious.
HURIWA National Coordinator, Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko, says the asset forfeiture lawsuit at a time Ekweremadu is in custody, facing trial in the United Kingdom, and unable to defend himself or properly brief his lawyers is malicious, immoral, in bad faith, and tantamount to a country throwing her citizen under the bus
The properties allegedly acquired by Ekweremadu with funds not supported by his legitimate income include a London property at Flat 4, Varsity Court, Hormer Street (WIH4NW) acquired on December 4, 2008 for £830,000; three properties in Florida, United States, one of which was purchased for $155,000 USD.
Others are a property on approximately 3000 square meter parcel of land consisting of 7 bedroom detached Boys Quarters, swimming pool, enclosed 3 car garage with roller shutter doors, gate house and generator house at No.6 Ilado Close, Ikoyi, Lagos bought for N630million on August 8, 2015; three blocks of six flats each, totaling 18 luxury flats at Plot 904 Durumi, Abuja acquired for N700million; and Four Rootown House at Villa No. 148 Maeeni the Lahes Emirate Hill Dubai valued at $250,00 USD.
Justice Inyang Ekwo made the order while ruling on a motion exparte brought by the EFCC in Suit No.FHC/ABJ/CS/1242/2022.
The Commission had approached the court for an order of interim forfeiture of the said properties which “are subject matters of investigation, enquiry and examination by the EFCC, which are reasonably suspected to be the proceeds of unlawful activity of money laundering committed by the respondents”.
It also added that there was a need “to preserve the properties from dissipation by the respondents”.
The said application was brought pursuant to Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006.
In a ruling on the exparte motion, the Judge granted the application, ordering the EFCC to publish the interim forfeiture order of the properties in a national daily within seven days from the date the Order was given.
Persons interested in the properties covered by the interim forfeiture order are expected to, within 14 days of the publication of the Order, show cause why the assets should not be permanently forfeited.
Justice Ekwo adjourned till December 5, 2022, for a report.
Afeez Mustapha, an investigator with the EFCC, in a supporting affidavit to the application, disclosed that the Commission commenced investigation of Ekeremadu following intelligence received from some foreign entities on suspicion of money laundering involving the acquisition of several properties in United Kingdom, Dubai and the United States of America through proxies and unregistered companies.
Meanwhile, HURIWA decried what it viewed as a concerted effort between the anti-graft agency and the London Metropolitan Police to botch Ekweremadu bail and keep him perpetually in detention.
HURIWA stated: “We are in shock over the news of the interim assets forfeiture order against Senator Ike Ekweremadu following an application by the EFCC.
“We are particularly shocked because it is coming at a time the Senator is fighting for his freedom, reputation, and the life of his daughter in a foreign land.
“We equally recall that the petition against Senator Ekweremadu, which he claimed was politically motivated, was lodged against him at the EFCC in 2016, but the Senator’s first brush with the anti-graft agency only came in the early hours of July 24, 2018, when operatives of the agency and a retinue of security agents laid siege to his Apo Legislative Quarters official residence without any previous invitation.
“It is instructive that security agencies also laid siege to the Maitama residence of the President of the Senate at the time, Dr. Bukola Saraki, in a simultaneous move that HURIWA and other civil society organisations rightly described as an attempt to muscle the legislature by preventing both presiding officers from plenary in order to remove them illegally from office. However, Saraki’s sudden appearance at the National Assembly botched their plan.
“We therefore find it discomfiting that although Ekweremadu was in Nigeria for the past six years, the EFCC suddenly found it auspicious to file assets forfeiture suits against him in July 2022 following the agency’s July 18, 2022 written assurances to the London Metropolitan Police ahead of the Senator’s bail hearing in July. That letter was tendered by the Metropolitan Police to scuttle Ekweremadu’s bail application.
“It is also instructive that this interim asset forfeiture order is again coming a few days to the pre-trial hearing on the Senator’s alleged organ harvest case in the UK rescheduled for Monday, November 7, 2022, and during which the Senator could reapply for bail.
“It is clearer why the court hearing was rescheduled from October 31 to November 7, 2022 after which the indefensible order must have been granted exparte against a man in detention contrary to cardinal principle in law that both sides should be heard.
“This development, coupled with the fact that Ekweremadu’s real trial would only begin in May 2023, leaves HURIWA with no other choice than to suspect that there is a collaborative effort between EFCC, Metropolitan Police, and UK prosecutors to scuttle Ekweremadu’s bail prospects, once again, and keep him perpetually in detention over a clearly bailable offence.
“Besides, HURIWA is also aware that the Senator had earlier won the two asset-related lawsuits between him and the Special Presidential Investigation Panel on the Recovery of Public Property (SPIP)”.
“We therefore reiterate that the EFCC’s move is malicious, immoral, ill-timed, political in appearance, and a typical case of a country throwing her citizen under the bus.
“If a country cannot help its citizen get a fair trial, why inject itself into his matter and add to his woes as the EFCC has done?”
