Justice Nicholas Oweibo of the Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday struck out an interim order of forfeiture he earlier granted seeking to forfeit 14 properties linked to the Kogi State governor Yahaya Bello to the federal government.
Justice Oweibo struck out the suit filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), on the ground that Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution prevents the institution of any criminal or civil case against a sitting governor or the president.
Grow your business with us
The judge had on February 22, granted the temporary forfeiture order following an ex-parte motion filed by the anti-graft agency seeking to seize 14 properties located in Lagos, Abuja and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as well as N400 million, allegedly recovered from one Aminu Falala.
The court also directed EFCC to make publication in two national dailies for any interested parties to come up and to show cause why the order should not be made absolute.
However, after the publication of the preservative order by the EFCC, Governor Bello filed a notice of intention to oppose and an application seeking the vacation of the interim forfeiture order.
Meanwhile, the EFCC, has filed an appeal, challenging the ruling of Justice Nicholas Oweibo of the Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos that struck out its suit seeking the forfeiture of 14 properties as well as the sum of N400million linked to the Kogi State governor, Yahaya Bello, citing his immunity from prosecution under the 1999 constitution.
EFCC spokesperson, Wilson Uwujaren said: “In the notice of appealed filed on Wednesday, the EFCC stated that Justice Oweibo erred in law when he struck out the suit as the immunity conferred on the respondent against any civil or criminal proceedings during his incumbency as a governor of Kogi State does not extend to properties reasonably suspected to be proceeds of crime traced to him.”
The governor, through his lawyer, Abdulwahab Mohammed (SAN), also argued that the property listed were not proceeds of an unlawful act, as they were acquired long before he was elected as Kogi State governor and could not have been received from Kogi State funds.
He submitted that the case was in flagrant disobedience to a state high court order which restrained the EFCC or government agency from taking action that may lead to the forfeiture of the properties.
He stated that the interim forfeiture order was obtained by either suppression or misrepresentation of facts by the commission.
The governor also said that the proceeding of the Crime Act could not take effect in retrospect as the property in dispute was acquired before he became Kogi State governor.
He said the validity of the Crime Act is being challenged at the Supreme Court.
Regarding jurisdiction, the government stated that the properties listed were in Abuja, Kogi and UAE, and the personality involved is based in Lokoja, adding that the suit ought to have been instituted either in Abuja or in Kogi State. He, therefore, asked the court to vacate the case for lack of jurisdiction.
In his response, the counsel to the EFCC, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), maintained that the applicant had placed sufficient materials before the court to convince the court to vacate the order.
Oyedepo also insisted that contrary to the Applicant’s submissions, Kogi State High Court or any other court in Nigeria has not stopped the EFCC from carrying out its constitutional duties.
He argued that while the governor enjoys immunity under Section 308 of the constitution, nothing stops the EFCC from investigating and preserving the proceeds of unlawful activities.
In his ruling, Justice Oweibo agreed with the commission that the Proceeds of Crime Act pending before the Supreme Court remains the law as the apex court is yet to pronounce on the validity of the law.
The judge, however, held that given Section 308 of the Constitution, which provides immunity for a sitting governor from any civil/criminal prosecution, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The court, therefore, struck out the suit for lack of jurisdiction.