news
THE MENTION OF THE NAME, PERE OF OLODIAMA CLAN, EVOKES UGLY MEMORIES
In 1986, one Timothy Ofunama, issued a statement saying that Gelegele belonged to Ijaw and that the Oba of Benin had no jurisdiction over it in the welcome address I presented when Omo N’Oba Ewuare II visited Obazuwa on January 28, I enumerated some of the provocative acts of the Ijaws. We wish to state some of them here again.
In 1985, Philips Oil Company established business in Ughoton. It built a Flow Station in Gelegele. Ijaw fishermen, who lived in stilt-houses around the swamps, came out and began to supply labour to the company. Many of the Benin youths in Ughoton and Gelegele had left the villages in search of a better life in the City. When they heard of the new company and the job opportunities if offered, they returned home to seek employment. The Ijaws were not happy at their return. They feared they would displace them (the Ijaws) in competition for jobs. Suddenly, they attacked the returnees. The attack was so violent and widespread that the government setup an administrative panel, headed by Mr. S. Jamgbadi, a Senior District Officer, to look into it. Part of the panel’s report reads:
“… it is however established that the Ijaws have been resident in Gelegele for many years and that during these years they have acquired landed property and cultivate farms but from the facts in evidence they qualify as TENANTS on the land their long period of occupation notwithstanding…”
The Ijaws were not done yet with agitation. They agitated again, the same year, against Philips Company itself. The cause of the agitation was that the company also gave employment to non-Iyaw persons. Government again set up an inquiry to look into the crisis. Part of the panel’s report reads:
“… The inquiry further revealed that the claims by the Ijaws to the monopoly of employment provided by the oil company are not only unpatriotic but also preposterous. The Ijaws have no right whatsoever to prevent the oil company from employing persons of their choice; they should stop threatening the oil company from employing other persons who are not Ijaw…”
On Thursday, November 20, 1986, as said earlier, Timothy Ofunama, in the publication in the Nigerian Observer said that Gelegele belonged to Ijaw and that the Oba of Benin had no jurisdiction over it. The government reacted to the publication through a press statement issued by the Honourable Commissioner for Local Government, Engr. Enoch Ejofodomi. I reproduce the statement here in full.
1. My attention has been drawn to a publication at page 4 of the Nigerian Observer Newspaper of Thursday, 20th November, 1986 titled “Public Notice” and credited to one Timothy Ofunama who styled himself as the “Ama-Okosuwei of Gelegele”. In which he gave the impression that the traditional administration of Gelegele was under the “Pere of Olodiama Clan” and other Ijaw Chiefs in Ovia Local Government Area of Bendel State.
2. From records available in my Ministry, there is no chieftaincy title known as the “Pere of Olodiama Clan” in Ovia Local Government Area. Also there are no chieftaincy titles known as “Ama-Okosuwei of Gelegele” and “Amanana-Owei of Gelegele”, as claimed in the above mentioned publication. In this regards the Government couldn’t have appointed anybody to these non-existent chieftaincy stools.
3. The author of the above mentioned vexations publication also gave the impression that the Oba of Benin has no right to confer the chieftaincy title of “Okao of Gelegele” on Chief I. Iyonmahari and that Gelegele and some other Ijaw towns in Ovia Local Government Area are not under the jurisdiction of the Oba of Benin. In this regard, my Ministry wants to make it abundantly clear that the Oba of Benin who is the traditional paramount ruler in Benin kingdom is the Prescribed Authority for Oredo, Orhionmwon and Ovia Local Government Areas by virtues of Bendel State Legal Notice 44 of 1979 published in the Bendel State Legal Notice 44 of 1979 published in the Bendel State of Nigeria Extraordinary Gazette No. 51. Vol. 16 of 28th, September, 1979; He therefore acted within his constitutional powers: as the prescribed Authority for the area ‘when he appointed Chief I. Iyonmahan as the Okao of Gelegele. It is also pertinent to point out that Gelegele in Ovia Local Government Area is part and parcel of Bini land under the jurisdiction of the Oba of Benin having regard to the judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered on 11th August, 1983 which made it clear that the land known as Gelegele belongs to the Binis.
4. In the light of the foregoing, Government sews the action of Timothy Ofunama who calls himself the “Ama-Okosuwei of Gelegele” as an attempt to incite the law abiding Ijaw citizens in Gelegele against their host as capable of causing serious disaffection among the entire community in that part of Ovia Local Government Area. I want to stress that Government will not tolerate that state of affairs which is capable of jeopardizing the peace, order and good government in the area.
5. For the purpose of clarification, it is considered necessary to inform the general public that it is not only contemptuous to reopen an issue on which the Supreme Court had already delivered judgment but that it is also unlawful for anyone to call himself a chief or allow himself to be so called or addressed if he has not been conferred with a chieftaincy title by a competent authority and has not been registered by the Ministry of Local Government as a Chief.
6. Finally, I want to warn that all those who are party to the aforementioned publication should desist forthwith from parading themselves either as traditional rulers or as traditional chiefs as the penalty for their actions under Sections 20 and 26 of the Traditional Rulers and Chiefs Law, 1979 is imprisonment for six months and two years respectively without an option of a fine.
(Engr. Enoch Ejofodomi)
Commissioner for Local Government
Ministry of Local Government
Benin City.
10th December 1986
The Ijaws still claim ownership of Gelegele. Yet, the question of who owns Gelegele had gone through litigation and had long been settled.
At the High Court of Justice, Benin, in suit B/44/1970, Judgment was delivered in favour of Benins by Honourable Justice Ekeruche on December 22, 1978. Part of the judgment reacts.
“…finally, I enter judgment in this case as follows: for the avoidance of all doubts, argument or controversy, I hear say unequivocally, that Gelegele village and its environs and bushes are Benin land. They do not belong to the Ijaws of Gelegele as owners. The Ijaws are tenants of His Highness Akenzua II the Oba of Benin. Apart from above, the plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed in their entirety”.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Ijaws went to the Court of Appeal, Benin. The court dismissed their appeal and delivered judgment in favour of Benin. The lead judgment was read by Honourable Justice Abdul Ganiyu Agbaje on December 16, 1981.
Still on satisfied, they headed for the Supreme Court. In Suit SC. 131/1/1982, Honourable Justice, Muhamadu Lawani Uwais (CJN) and four (4) others, on August 19, 1983 also dismisses their appeal and up-held the judgment of the lower courts. The CJN concluded thus:
“… For three reasons I am of the opinion that the appellants’ argument in support of the sole ground of appeal should be discountenanced. The appeal therefore fails and it is dismissed with N300.00 costs to the respondents. The decision of the Federal Court of Appeal is affirmed…”
The Supreme Court awarded costs against the Ijaws. Despite these judgments, the various reports and government statements, the Ijaws still claim ownership of Gelegele!
In 1987, they attacked Benin indigenes in Iko and Isekiri and Urhobo settlers there. They destroyed the Ogua-edion in Iko, they moved up-hill, to Ikonoke and unleashed mayhem. Benin indigenes in Ikonoke and in Ikonugboghodo fled, giving room to the Ijaws to entrench themselves in both places. At that time and up till the early 90s, one Pa Igbinosun, a Benin man, was the Odionwere of Iko, they have forayed into Agbomoba, Ozomu, Igbobi, Ekete, Ite, Orogo, Ewudu, Abiala, Eki-ohuan (now known as Ekewan), Okomu and Gelegele. They maim the Benin people in these communities and destroy their properties.
In June 2011, we, offered a parcel of land to Edo State government for the erection of a model school block. The Government sent a team led by the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, then Mrs. Idaho is now the Head of Service. In anticipation of the inspection, we directed Obazuwa boys to demarcate the plot. As the boys were measuring it, Ijaws militants descended on them with machetes, guns, and clubs. Without any provocation, they brutalized the boys and abducted two of them. Obazuwa boys were unnamed and defenseless.
We sent an S.O.S to the Governor who directed his Chief of Staff, then Barr. Osarodion Ogie, to take up the matter with the Commissioner of Police. The Police Commissioner promptly dispatched a team of policemen from Evbotubu Police Station to rescue the abducted boys. He sent another team from SARS to arrest the militants who brutalized the boys, destroyed their motorcycles and a car. Those arrested were charged to Okada Magistrate’s Court where the case is still pending up till now.
In order to strengthen their claim of ownership of Gelegele, they have now coined names, Gelegelegbene and Gelegele-ama. These names are new. In all their previous write-ups and the dispatches by early European visitors. Gelegele had always been known and spelt as Gelegele. The use of Gelegelegbene and Gelegele-ama which they have only recently coined is ludicrous and intellectually dishonest.
Our people got judgment in the Supreme Court 34 years ago. Now they want to claim their judgment right. Those who were driven away from their homeland, Abiala, and Ikon’oke, want to return home. They want to erect a house in Gelegele for the Okao of Gelegele who was installed there by the Oba of Benin.
The Edo State Ijaws are bellicose, belligerent, militant, quarrelsome and unfriendly. They are fighting the Itsekiris in Warri; they are fighting the Urhobos, the Ibibios and the Ilajes. They are claiming land whereas they traditionally live in swamps along the coastal areas in houses they build on stilts.
The so-called Beni-Ebe, Toru-Ebe Kengama and Abadi States which they requested the Senate to create for them in 2009, traverses the whole of the Nigerian coastline, encroaching of Benin, Ibibio, Ilaje and Itsekiri territories.
We plead for your support in curbing the Ijaw aggressiveness and in enforcing the Supreme Court Judgment for which the Ijaws have rudely insulted the highest court in the Country, Honourable Justice, and the Chief Justice of Nigeria whom they contemptuously described as fraudulent.
This press statement was endorsed by HRH Prince Edun Akenzua, MFR, FNGE, Ogie-Obazuwa and six other Enigie for on behalf of 48 communities in the affected areas in the Benin Kingdom.
Harmonisation of versions begins •Red Chamber okays e-upload to IREV
The controversy over the passage of the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2026 at the Senate was laid to rest yesterday.
The Red Chamber endorsed electronic transmission of election results, without including the contentious “real-time” provision.
This was shortly before it adopted the Votes and Proceedings of the passage of the Bill, which scaled third reading on February 4, during a rowdy session.
Because the version passed by the Senate did not include “real-time” transmission, unlike the version earlier passed by the House of Representatives, a conference committee of both chambers will harmonise the bills before final approval and eventual presentation for presidential assent.
The amendment of Section 60(3), effected yesterday and passed along with other sections read by Senate President Godswill Akpabio, states: “The Presiding Officer shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the INEC Result Viewing Portal, and such transmission shall be done after the prescribed Form EC8A has been signed and stamped by the Presiding Officer and countersigned by the candidates or polling agents where available at the polling unit.
“But if the electronic transmission of the result fails as a result of communication failure, and it becomes impossible to transmit the result electronically, the signed and stamped Form EC8A by the Presiding Officer, and countersigned by the candidates or polling agents where available, shall in such a case be the primary source of collation and declaration of results.”
This differs slightly from the version passed by the House of Representatives in December, which states: “The Commission shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the IREV portal in real time, and each transmission shall be done simultaneously with the physical collation of results.”
The House also passed Section 60(5), which provides: “The Presiding Officer shall transmit the results, including the number of accredited voters, to the next level of collation.”
The Electoral Act 2022, under which the 2023 elections were conducted and which is in the process of being repealed, states in part under Section 60(5): “The Presiding Officer shall transfer the result, including the total number of accredited voters and the result of the ballot, in a manner as prescribed by the Commission.”
Before senators began proceedings yesterday, protesters, for the second consecutive day, gathered in front of the National Assembly to call for the passage of real-time electronic transmission of election results.
Among the protesters was the former Governor of Rivers State and immediate past Minister of Transportation, Chibuike Amaechi.
The police prevented the protesters from gaining access to the National Assembly complex.
Inside the chamber, the Senate passed the Electoral Act Amendment Bill after a heated debate in a rowdy plenary session.
At the session presided over by Senate President Godswill Akpabio, senators modified their earlier position on real-time electronic transmission of poll results.
They consequently approved a revised clause mandating electronic transmission of results from polling units to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IREV), with a fallback mechanism in the event of network failure.
In such instances, Form EC8A, on which results are recorded, would serve as the basis for collation.
The amendment, once harmonised with the House of Representatives’ version and signed into law by the President, is expected to legalise the use of IREV in the result transmission process, unlike what obtained during the 2023 elections.
There was palpable tension in the hallowed chamber as the initial proposal to adopt the Votes and Proceedings of the previous sitting led to heated procedural disputes, which were carefully managed by Akpabio.
Outside the National Assembly, protesters continued to agitate for the inclusion of the real-time electronic uploading clause, which had been upheld in the House of Representatives’ version of the bill.
The modification followed the approval of a motion by the Senate Chief Whip, Mohammed Tahir Monguno (Borno North), titled: “Motion for Rescission on Clause 60(3) of the Electoral Act, 2022 (Repeal and Enactment) Bill, 2026.”
Moving the motion, Monguno recalled that the bill had been passed by the Senate on February 4 but said “fresh issues have emerged in respect of Clause 60(3), which require further legislative consideration to ensure the conduct of smooth, transparent and credible elections in Nigeria.”
Invoking Orders 1(b) and 52(6) of the Senate Standing Orders, 2023 (as amended), he urged the chamber to rescind its earlier decision on the clause and recommit it to the Committee of the Whole for reconsideration and passage.
Trouble began when Monguno rose to move the motion while the Senate President was reading out the rules on Votes and Proceedings.
His action triggered confusion, with many senators questioning whether the Senate could revisit a decision already taken within the same legislative session.
Some senators argued that Order 1(b) empowered the Senate to suspend normal procedure.
Following a voice vote, the chamber agreed to allow Monguno to proceed.
Monguno said ambiguity surrounding the earlier amendment, particularly the controversy over the use of the words “transfer” and “transmission” of election results, had generated public concern and required urgent legislative clarification.
He proposed a fresh amendment stipulating that presiding officers at polling units must electronically transmit results to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IREV) after completing and signing Form EC8A.
He added that where electronic transmission fails due to communication challenges, the signed and stamped Form EC8A would serve as the primary source for collation and declaration of results.
After the motion was seconded by Senator Abba Moro, who described the development as “a victory for democracy,” the chamber descended into disorder when the Senate President declared that the voice vote had carried the amendment.
Several senators protested and invoked Order 72, which allows any senator to challenge the opinion of the presiding officer by calling for a division.
Citing Order 72, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe demanded individual voting, triggering loud protests, shouts of points of order, and repeated calls to order by Akpabio.
At the height of the confusion, Abaribe withdrew his request for a division, a move that further unsettled the chamber.
Akpabio ruled that Abaribe’s withdrawal stood, thereby upholding the voice vote that carried the amendment.
Following the approval of the revised clause, the Senate adopted the Votes and Proceedings of the previous sitting, bringing the stormy session to a close.
African currency exchange services
To fast-track harmonisation of the Electoral Bill with the House of Representatives’ version, the Senate expanded its conference committee from nine to 12 members to match the number of conferees from the House.
Reps committee
Electoral Reform Bill at harmonisation stage, Reps say
Reps committee summons finance, agriculture ministers, auditor general
The committee is chaired by Senator Simon Bako Lalong, with Mohammed Tahir Monguno, Adamu Aliero, Orji Uzor Kalu, Abba Moro, Asuquo Ekpenyong, Aminu Iyal Abbas, Tokunbo Abiru, Adeniyi Ayodele Adegbonmire, Jibrin Isah (Echocho), Banigo Ipalibo and Onyekachi Nwebonyi as members.
Expressing optimism that the committee would conclude its work swiftly, Akpabio said: “This is a matter of urgency. If you are able to conclude within the next few days or one week, the President should be able to sign this amended Electoral Bill within this month.”
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who spoke in Minna, the capital of Niger State, said electronic transmission of results would restore sanity and avert chaos.
However, he expressed doubts about the ability of the proposed law to guarantee real-time transmission.
Atiku said: “This is below the expectations of Nigerians. During the last elections, Nigerians were expecting real-time electronic transmission of election results at various levels of the election, but what we got was a mixture of electronic and manual uploading, which caused more confusion and chaos.
“It will be best if we have a single-tier electronic transmission, which is real-time electronic transmission, which is the preference of all Nigerians.”
The African Democratic Congress (ADC) stalwart urged opposition political parties to reject the Senate’s decision to allow manual uploading of election results.
He said: “We need all opposition political parties to pursue this issue. We should not allow it to rest the way they wanted it to rest today at the Senate.”
The African Democratic Party (ADP) warned of likely public distrust of the electoral process if electronic transmission is not upheld.
The party’s National Chairman, Yabagi Sani, said in a statement that “while the Senate’s reversal of its earlier rejection of electronic transmission reflects public pressure and democratic expectation, the ADP notes that a reform that does not guarantee mandatory, real-time transmission cannot restore electoral credibility.”
The ADC National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, described the Senate’s modified position as a victory for the resilience, vigilance and rising political consciousness of Nigerians.
He said in a statement: “It demonstrates, in the clearest possible terms, that when citizens act with unity, clarity of purpose and resolve, they can indeed move mountains.”
The ADC credited Nigerians’ coordinated civic actions, noting: “From the street protests to the digital campaigns, the Nigerian people have once again shown that sovereignty truly belongs to them.”
Hailing the protesters, Abdullahi added: “We salute the courage and tenacity of Nigerians. We commend every citizen who raised a voice, whether online or offline, to resist legislative mischief that threatened to undermine our electoral integrity.”
A former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Dr Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), said the adoption of real-time upload of results would engender public trust and close electoral loopholes.
He said the regulatory process must be adequately backed by law.
Agbakoba noted in a statement that the 2023 election exposed a critical gap in the electoral legal framework, recalling that despite INEC’s deployment of the IREV portal for electronic transmission of results, the Supreme Court ruled that the innovation lacked legal force.
The human rights lawyer explained that the IREV portal currently serves only for public viewing and is not admissible as evidence of results in election petitions.
He said: “The message was unmistakable: without explicit statutory provision, electronic transmission remains optional and legally inconsequential, no matter how transparent or efficient it may be.
“This legal gap creates an insurmountable evidentiary burden in election petitions.”
The Tanimu Turaki-led faction of the PDP rejected the Senate’s position on transmission of election results, describing the senators as “clever by half.”
The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Comrade Ini Ememobong, said in a statement that the addendum introduced by the Senate to allow manual transmission was a backdoor attempt to achieve the same objective as the earlier rejection.
The statement reads in part: “We have taken note of the outcome of the Senate’s reconsideration of its earlier position on the real-time electronic transmission of election results, wherein an addendum was introduced to permit manual transmission where technology is said to fail.
“We hold the firm view that this addendum is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to achieve the same objective as the earlier outright rejection, while pretending to align with the wishes of the Nigerian people.
“Manual transmission is already sufficiently provided for under the Electoral Act. The current agitation for electronic transmission is aimed at introducing a second-layer authentication mechanism that prevents the alteration of results en route to collation centres, a malpractice that has historically been the bane of Nigeria’s electoral process.
“Furthermore, it is inconceivable that the same BVAS technology, which successfully undertakes accreditation throughout an election, would suddenly become unreliable for the transmission of results and accreditation data arising from that same exercise.
“This caveat is a clear indication of the humongous fear being harboured by senators opposed to electronic transmission, particularly Senate President Godswill Akpabio, whom we reasonably suspect remains haunted by the ghost of his 2019 election loss, occasioned by the deployment of technology to curb over-voting.
“They must be reminded that Nigeria is bigger than their narrow personal and political interests.
“We therefore urge members of the Conference Committee to adopt the version of the bill passed by the House of Representatives as the harmonised position, if indeed they are committed to delivering credible elections in 2027.
“They must rise above the instincts of politicians fixated on the next election and instead focus on the sustenance of democracy and the protection of future generations.
“Should this democracy fail, the names of Senator Akpabio and all senators who voted against electronic transmission will undoubtedly occupy a conspicuous chapter in the book of infamy.
“We also call on Nigerians to remain resolute in their demand for real-time electronic transmission of election results. This is no time for excuses. This hard-won democracy is far too valuable to be left in the hands of politicians alone.”
The Ooni of Ife, His Imperial Majesty, Oba Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi, Ojaja II, has accepted to be the Royal Father of the Day at the New Telegraph Awards Night/ Dinner holding at the Grand Ballroom of the Oriental Hotels, Lagos this Friday.
That is as veteran Elder journalist and former Governor of Ogun State, Aremo Olusegun Osoba, has also accepted to be the Chairman of the event.
The New Telegraph Awards Night/Dinner is a high octane event, where governors, captains of industry, banking and financial institutions and executives as well as public, private sector players and sports personalities would be honoured.
Nine state governors from across the country have confirmed their attendance at the event, with other awardees expressing delight and anticipation towards the event.
In a letter conveying his choice as the Royal Father of the Day, the Management of Daily Telegraph Publishing Company, publishers of the New Telegraph, Saturday and Sunday Telegraph titles informed the paramount ruler and the number one Yoruba king that his choice was borne out of his dedication to excellence and public good in his 10-year reign as the Paramount Ruler of the Yoruba Nation.
“Your Highness, it is important to let you know that you were chosen because of your position as not only the Paramount Ruler of one of the largest and homogenous nations in Nigeria, but also because of your dedication to service, excellence, reward and honesty in your over 10-year reign on the throne of your ancestors.
The letter was delivered to him personally by the Managing Director/Editor-in-Chief of the newspaper, Mr Ayodele Aminu. Similarly, Aremo Osoba, a former Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Times and Grand Patron of the Nigerian Guild of Editors, was chosen because of his close association with his profession, several years after serving as governor.
Osoba is ever present in the activities of journalists and editors, despite being a leading political figure in the country.
According to Aminu, Osoba reflects the dream of not only journalists but every profession because he did not forget his roots and easily identifies with his colleagues, no matter the gap in age and experience.
More applicants have approached the Federal High Court in Abuja over some properties linked to former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN).
The applicants prayed for the setting aside of the interim forfeiture order made against some of the property linked to the former minister.
They argued that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) failed to establish any nexus between their property and any unlawful activity, contrary to Section 135 of the Evidence Act and the Advance Fee Fraud.
In their separate motions on notice filed by their lawyers, the applicants – Alhaji Muktaka Usman Junju, and Rayhaan Bustan and Agro Allied Limited – urged the court to vacate and discharge the order made on January 6 by Justice Emeka Nwite.
Junju, a businessman, through his lawyer, Kalu Kalu Agu, prayed the court to set aside the order made on property listed as Number 40 by the EFCC.
Rayhaan Limited, an agricultural food production company, through its lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN), also asked the court to remove property listed as numbers one, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32 from the list of property brought by the anti-graft agency.
The duo, in their applications, also prayed the court for an order directing the immediate restoration of their possession, control, and enjoyment of the listed property from the 57 property sought to be forfeited to the Federal Government.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) recalls that the property listed as number 40 in the EFCC’s schedule is Al-Afiya Energy Tanker Garage, opposite Rayhaan University Health Centre, along Sani Abacha Bypass Road, Birnin-Kebbi, valued at N2,450,000,000.00.
Property Number One is a luxury duplex at Amazon Street, Plot Number 3011 within the Cadastral Zone, A06 Maitama; File Number: An enhancement 11352, which was purchased in December 2022 at N500,000,000.00 (value after enhancement at N5,950,000,000).
Property numbers 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, which are under Rayhaan Agro Allied Factory in Kebbi, include Factory Buildings, Factory Machines and Plants Units, Factory Mosque, Rayhaan Mill Staff Quarters and Rayhaan Bustan Building, valued at N4,200,000,000.00; N10,500,000, 000.00; N2,450,000,000.00; N1, 487,500,000.00; and N3,150,000, 000.00 respectively.
NAN reports that Justice Nwite had, on Jan. 6, ordered the interim forfeiture of the 57 property suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities linked to Mr. Malami.
The multi-billion naira landed properties are located in Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna States.
The judge granted the order following an ex parte motion moved by the EFCC’s lawyer, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, to the effect.
Malami was the AGF and Minister of Justice in the Muhammadu Buhari administration.
Nwite, in the ruling, also directed the publication of the interim order of forfeiture in any national daily, inviting any person(s) or body (ies) who might have an interest in the property to show cause, within 14 days of the publication, why a final order of forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria should not be made.
Although the case was formerly before Justice Nwite, the case file had been transferred by the chief judge to Justice Obiora Egwuatu of a sister court for adjudication.
Also in his motion on notice dated January 26, but filed January 28 by Agu, Junju stated that the property listed as Number 40 belonged to him.
According to Junju, the root of title and acquisition history are described in the schedule attached to the affidavit in support of the motion, as Exhibit A.
Nigerian Property Investment
His lawyer argued that the commission had not established that the property was proceeds of an unlawful purpose, which, he argued, robbed the court of jurisdiction.
Agu submitted that the EFCC had failed to comply with the constitutional and statutory dictates of Section 44(2) (b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 17(1) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006, requiring it to disclose specific particulars of the alleged unlawful act committed and the applicable laws.
Besides, he said the court did not conduct a global review of the entire documents and exhibits attached to the commission’s motion ex parte filed on January 6 and granted the same date, “which constitutes an abdication of its judicial duty to properly consider the application to ensure there is a reasonable suspicion that the property was linked to unlawful activities.”
The lawyer argued that Junju duly purchased the land in question “from an original allottee, by name Alhaji Usman Na’Allah Bunza and has no link with Malami, SAN or any Al-Afiya Garage.”
“Respondent (EFCC) is guilty of fraud and non-disclosure of material facts regarding ownership and acquisition of property of the applicant (Junju) forfeited in the interim by the orders of this honourable court.
“The interim forfeiture was procured in violation of Section 5 of the Assets Tracing, Recovery and Management Regulations 2019, having not been initiated through the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation,” Agu said.
Also in his argument, Daudu, in their motion dated Jan. 19 but filed Jan. 23, said Rayhaan Ltd, by law, is a corporate person and can acquire and own property anywhere in Nigeria.
He described Rayhaan as “a limited liability company, duly registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) pursuant to the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA).”
The senior lawyer said properties listed as Nos. 1, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 all belonged to the company.
“The applicant’s property Number One was acquired with payments made from Excel Merchants Ltd in favour of the applicant,” he said.
Daudu also said the property numbers 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32 were acquired by the company from banking facilities granted by NEXIM BANK, the Bank of Industry and Access Bank Plc.
“The NEXIM Bank loan has now been called in by reason of the interim order of forfeiture of January 6, 2026.
“Zenith Bank Plc, which had guaranteed the loan, has revoked the guarantee by reason of the interim order of forfeiture of January 6, 2026, and has commenced daily interest charges on the outstanding sum,” Daudu said.
The lawyer argued that the EFCC did not establish that the assets listed as numbers one, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32, in the interim forfeiture order were proceeds of some unlawful activities, as required under Section 17 (1) of the Advance Fee Fraud Act 2006, and that no predicate offence was linked to the acquisition of the property.
He also argued that the court was not invoked and prompted to conduct a global review of the entire documents and exhibits attached to the motion ex parte, “which constitutes an abdication of its judicial duty to properly consider the application to ensure that there is a reasonable suspicion that they were linked to unlawful action.”
Daudu aligned with Agu that the EFCC “is guilty of fraud and non-disclosure of material facts regarding ownership and acquisition of properties of the applicant forfeited by the orders” of the court.
He submitted that the proceedings of January 6 amounted to unlawful deprivation of property, denial of fair hearing and abuse of court process, urging the court to set the same aside.
Malami had, equally, filed a motion, praying the court to vacate the interim order of forfeiture against his property.
Also, Justice Egwuatu has fixed February 12 for the hearing of the matter.
-
news5 years agoUPDATE: #ENDSARS: CCTV footage of Lekki shootings intact – Says Sanwo – Olu
-
lifestyle6 years agoFormer Miss World: Mixed reactions trail Agbani Darego’s looks
-
health5 years agoChairman Agege LG, Ganiyu Egunjobi Receives Covid-19 Vaccines
-
lifestyle4 years agoObateru: Celebrating a Quintessential PR Man at 60
-
health6 years agoUPDATE : Nigeria Records 790 new cases of COVID-19
-
health6 years agoBREAKING: Nigeria confirms 663 new cases of COVID-19
-
entertainment1 year agoAshny Set for Valentine Special and new Album ‘ Femme Fatale’
-
news9 months agoBREAKING: Tinubu swears in new NNPCL Board