A former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, NNPC Mr. Andrew Yakubu, in a suit filed by his counsel, Ahmed Raji, SAN has asked the Federal High Court sitting in Kano to set aside the ex parte order of interim forfeiture on the $9,772,000 and £74,000 recently seized from one of his homes in Kaduna state.
Yakubu argued that the court lacked the jurisdiction to grant FG ownership of his money.
The applicant’s prayer is anchored on two grounds.
He said the court lacked jurisdiction to grant the order of forfeiture because the offence from which the money emanated as its proceeds were allegedly not committed within the Kano jurisdiction of the court.
The applicant also argued that the Federal Government lacked locus standi to apply for the interim forfeiture order.
The court paper in part reads; “An order setting aside, discharging or vacating the ex-parte Order made by this Honourable Court on the 13th of February, 2017, which ordered the interim forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria of the respective sums of $9,772,800 and £74,000,000 belonging to the respondent/applicant, same having been made without jurisdiction.”
“No aspect of the perceived offence in respect of which the Order of February 13, 2017 was made, was committed within the Kano judicial division of this Honourable Court”.
“By Section 28 of the EFCC Act, only the commission, i.e. the EFCC has the vires to seek an order for the interim forfeiture of property under the Act. The power of this Honourable Court to make interim forfeiture order(s) pursuant to sections 28 & 29 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act, 2004 (herein after referred to a “EFCC Act”) is applicable ONLY to alleged offences charged under the EFCC Act and not to offences cognizable under any other law.
The ex-parte order of this honourable court dated February 13, 2017, was made in respect of alleged offences under the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission Act (herein after “ICPC Act”) and not the EFCC Act as prescribed by section 28 & 29 thereof.
The ex-parte order of this honourable court dated February 13, 2017, was made in respect of alleged offences under the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission Act (herein after “ICPC Act”) and not the EFCC Act as prescribed by section 28 & 29 thereof.
The conditions precedent to the grant of an interim forfeiture order under sections 28 & 29 of the EFCC Act were not complied with by the Applicant (FG) before the Order was made”.
“The combined effect of Sections 28 & 29 of the EFCC Act is that a charge alleging infractions against the provisions of the EFCC Act ought to be brought against a suspect before the powers of this honourable court under Sections 28 & 29 of the EFFCC Act, to order interim forfeiture of property, can be actuated.”
No comments:
Post a Comment