Court to hear evidence in ex-First Lady forfeiture suit April 12

A Federal High Court Lagos on Wednesday fixed April 12 to hear oral evidence in a suit by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seeking final forfeiture of about $8.4 million and N7.4 billion linked to former First Lady, Patience Jonathan.

Justice Mojisola Olatoregun had in a ruling delivered on February 28 on the motion for final forfeiture held that there were conflicting affidavits, which could be best resolved if respective parties were called upon to give oral evidence.

The case was consequently, adjourned until March 13 for oral evidences. However, on Wednesday, the case could not proceed as scheduled because the EFCC had secured an interim order for forfeiture of the funds on April 20, 2018, before Olatoregun, through a motion ex parte.

It joined as respondents, Patience Jonathan, Globus Integrated Services Limited, Finchley Top Homes Limited, Am-Pm Global Network Limited, Pagmat Oil and Gas Limited, Magel Resort Limited and Esther Oba.

Also, on October 29, 2018, the EFCC counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, had moved his motion for final forfeiture of the amounts, urging that same be finally forfeited to the federal government.

Meanwhile, defence counsels, Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and Ige Asemudara respectively, had moved their applications opposing the motion for final forfeiture.

On January 15, the court admitted electronic evidence as presented by respondent counsel, which depicted video exhibits showing various business outfits of the third and sixth respondents

The court had then adjourned for judgment. In a ruling on February 28, the judge had first dismissed an application by counsel to the respondents, seeking to set aside the interim forfeiture orders made on April 20, 2018.

The court had held that it was satisfied that the requirement for the grant of the interim orders was met by the EFCC, adding that it was clear that at the time the interim order was made, there was no pending suit elsewhere.

Meanwhile, giving its ruling on the motion for final forfeiture, the court held that it finds the affidavit before it as conflicting, adding that same can only be resolved, if the parties concerned were called upon to give oral evidences.

The court had asked if having regards to the provisions of Sections 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, as well as the available facts before the court, whether the applicant has made out a case for final forfeiture of the funds.

“I have examined the issues raised on both sides and l came to the conclusion after exhaustively going through the affidavits filed by parties and l found the affidavits conflicting on material facts.

“I believe in the circumstance, that the court cannot rely on its own opinion alone; the conflict must only be determined or resolved by the evidences of parties themselves, particularly as it relates to the source of the funds. I believe parties should be heard and cross examined on this issue,” Justice Olatoregun held.