The Federal High Court in Abuja has made an order for final forfeiture of an Abuja property worth N70 million to the Federal Government.
Justice James Omotosho gave the order on Tuesday following a motion on notice for final forfeiture moved by Emenike Mgbemele, counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Justice Omotosho held that the EFCC’s application was meritorious, having complied with the earlier court order to publish the interim forfeiture order in a national daily for interested person(s) to show cause why the final order should not be made with respect to the property.
NAN reports that the property in question is located at No. 12, 5th Avenue, 59 Crescent, Gwarimpa in Abuja.
The anti-graft agency had, in the motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/2431/2025, sought an order of final forfeiture of the property to the Federal Government of Nigeria.
.
It said the property, comprising one unit of 4 bedroom detached bungalow with pent house and two-room boys quarters, was reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
In the motion dated Feb. 9 but filed Feb. 10 by Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, the lawyer gave six grounds why the motion should be granted.
Iheanacho argued that the court had the statutory powers under the provision of Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 to grant the relief sought.
He said the property sought to be forfeited is reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
According to him, on 13th of January, 2026, the honourable court made an interim order, forfeiting the property to the Federal Government of Nigeria.
He said the order had been published in Business Day Newspaper of Jan. 23.
The lawyer, who stated that no cause had been shown why the property subject of the order of interim forfeiture should not be finally forfeited to the Federal Government, said this was a non-conviction based asset forfeiture proceeding.
In the affidavit attached to the application and deposed to by Alozie Andrew, an EFCC investigator, he said a petition was received from the Anti-Corruption Network.
He said on receipt of the petition, it was assigned to his team for discreet investigation.
He said several investigation activities were carried out which included seeking and obtaining bank records from commercial banks, seeking and receiving corporate details from Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) in respect of the corporate bodies that featured in the case.
He said they equally sought and received information from EFAB Properties Limited requesting for necessary information, inviting and interviewing persons and representatives of companies that featured in the investigation; among other activities.
The investigator said the N70 million used in the purchase of the property was traced to the Kogi State internally Generated Revenue Service (KGIRS).
“That Senator Oseni Yakubu, while serving as the Chairman of KGIRS approved payments to Bespoque Business Solutions Ltd to which he was the sole Signatory to and directed that the sum of Seventy Million Naira (N70,000,000.00) he received as kickback from the consultant, be applied to purchase the said property.”
Andrew alleged that the N70 million which was received as a kickback by Sen. Yakubu from consultancy fees paid to Bespoque Business Solutions Ltd, was paid to EFAB Properties Ltd in two tranches of N25 million and N45 million.
“That Senator Yakubu was invited and after being interviewed, he volunteered his statement in writing, under words of caution.
“That Mr Philip Kuma, the Managing Director of Bespoque Business Solutions Lid was also invited and after being interviewed, he volunteered his statement in writing.
“That Senator Yakubu confirmed that he purchased the said property in the name of Nuhu Muhammed for Kabiru Aliyu with funds received from the consultant as kickbacks.
“That Kabiru Aliyu was invited and after being interviewed, he volunteered his statement in writing, under words of caution where he denied being the owner of the said property.
“That Nuhu Muhammed was also invited and after being interviewed, he volunteered his statement in writing, under words of caution,” he said.
The official, who said the court had the power and discretion to grant the application, prayed the court to grant it in the interest of justice.
Earlier when the case was called for ruling, Mgbemele represented EFCC and Mike Enahoro-Ebah announced his appearance for interested party/owner of the property.
Enahoro-Ebah, who sought the court’s permission, said their motion was filed on Feb.16.
But Justice Omotosho said the motion was not in the court record.
“I do not have that motion here before me. I am going to deliver my ruling. Counsel, You know the step to take,” the judge said.
Enahoro-Ebah responded that though from all indications, the process was not in the file, he said: “We filed on Monday.”
The EFCC lawyer, however, argued that the commission had complied with the court order made on Jan. 13 and that the publication was done on Jan. 23.
He said though the commission had 14 days statutorily to make the publication, more days were added to give any interested person the opportunity to show cause.
Delivering the ruling, Justice Omotosho observed that the EFCC had complied with the interim order forfeiture made on Jan. 13.
“The court has considered this application and has one issue for formulation;
“Whether an order of final forfeiture should not be made.,” he said.
The judge, who cited relevant laws to back his ruling, held that forfeiture is a form of punishment on property unlawfully acquired by an offender.
He said a preservation order would be made by court to preserve property suspected to have been gotten from proceeds of unlawful activities.
According to him, the court shall make a final order of forfeiture when it is confirmed that the property is from proceeds of unlawful activities.
“Having published the motion on notice and the interim forfeiture order in Business Day Newspaper, there is therefore nothing stopping this court to make the final order
“In the final analysis, the application of tye applicant has merit and same is liable to be granted,” the judge held.
After the delivery of the ruling Justice Omotosho advised Enahoro-Ebah to do the needful if unsatisfied with the ruling.
“Anybody that is interested knows what to do legally.
“I don’t just deliver ruling immediately, I adjourn for about a week and having done that, the time to react to same has elapsed,” the judge said.
