The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled June 30 to hear a suit filed by former minister of petroleum resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, challenging the forfeiture of her assets by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
During Friday’s proceedings, Diezani was represented by Godwin Iyinbor from the chambers of lawyer Mike Ozekhome, while the EFCC was absent from the court.
Iyinbor reminded the court, presided over by Justice Musa Umar, that Justice Inyang Ekwo—who previously handled the matter—had warned that “any party who prevented the definite hearing of the matter on the next adjourn date would pay costs.”
Justice Umar, however, clarified that the warning was not issued by him and opted to give the anti-graft agency another opportunity to appear. He subsequently ordered that hearing notices be served on the EFCC and adjourned the case to June 30.
In the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023, Diezani asked the court to extend the time within which she could apply to set aside the EFCC’s public notice announcing the sale of her properties. The legal battle began in 2023.
The former minister argued that the orders leading to the forfeiture of her assets were made “without jurisdiction,” and that she was denied fair hearing throughout the proceedings.
Among the five reliefs sought in her application is the annulment of the EFCC’s public notice on the sale of her assets. She insisted that “the various court orders issued in favour of the EFCC violated her constitutional right to fair hearing as enshrined in Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution.”
Diezani also maintained that she was “never served with the charge sheet, proof of evidence or summons regarding the charge against her,” alleging that the court was misled into granting the forfeiture order “due to the suppression or non-disclosure of critical information.”
In response, the EFCC urged the court to dismiss her application, maintaining that she had been properly brought before the court.
The commission argued that “the application for final forfeiture of her assets had been properly instituted and conducted following all legal requirements.”
It added that the properties in question had been “duly disposed of following the court’s order, which had been made in 2017 and which had not been overturned on appeal.”
