*Godwin Emefiele, ex-Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, through A.M. Kotoye, his legal representative, files a motion praying the Court to reverse a recent judgment on final forfeiture granting the Federal Government the full control of the 753-unit housing estate

Isola Moses | 绿帽献妻

Following the recent court order on seizure of the sprawling properties, Mr. Godwin Emefiele, a former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), is praying the Court of Appeal, in Abuja, FCT, to nullify its recent judgment granting the Federal Government the ownership and full control of the 753-unit housing estate in the capital city.

绿帽献妻 reports the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had earlier obtained a court order to confiscate the estate, situated in the Lokogoma district of Abuja.

The EFCC originally, had said the properties were acquired with proceeds of official corruption, and announced to Nigerians that it recovered same properties from “an unnamed former government official”.

However, the anti-graft Commission later revealed the said 鈥渦nnamed former government official鈥� is Emefiele.

Emefiele’s basis for challenging final forfeiture of properties

It was learnt that in a renewed move to reclaim ownership of the forfeited Abuja housing estate, however, Emefiele, through A.M. Kotoye, his legal representative, has filed a motion as an interested party in the suit.

Kotoye argued that Emefiele ought to have been involved in the forfeiture proceedings in the Nigerian court.

The former CBN Governor is now seeking the appeal court鈥檚 reversal of the lower court鈥檚 ruling, Channels TV report said.

In his contentions, Emefiele sought an extension of time to challenge the interim and final forfeiture orders issued by the court December 2 and december 24, 2024, respectively.

Emefiele also told the court that the forfeiture proceedings were carried out without his knowledge.

The defendant equally alleged that the EFCC published the interim forfeiture notice in “an obscure section of a newspaper”, making it difficult for him to respond in a timely manner.

The former Governor of CBN further explained to the court that during the relevant period, he was standing trial in three separate criminal cases in courts in Abuja and Lagos respectively, the situation which made it practically impossible for him to discover the EFCC’s publication in the newspaper.

Besides, Emefiele had accused the EFCC of deliberately concealing the forfeiture proceedings, despite their regular interactions with him concerning other pending charges in courts.

The court in a judgement delivered by justice J. O Onwuegbuzie, later dismissed Emefiele鈥檚 motion.

The court had ruled stated Section 17(2) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, governs the notice requirements in forfeiture proceedings.

The High Court further held that Emefiele鈥檚 claim that the publication was “obscure” was not acceptable.

According to the court, a half-page notice in a national newspaper could not reasonably be described as hidden in the public space.

Appellant seeks 5 reliefs in Court of Appeal: Kotoye

Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, Emefiele in an appeal dated April 30, 2025, approached the appellate court through Kotoye, his counsel seeking five reliefs, according to report.

The appeal, which names Emefiele as “the Appellant”, and the EFCC as the sole Respondent, prayed the court for an order allowing the appeal, report stated.

The ex-CBN Chief as well prayed for an order of the 鈥渉onourable court setting aside the judgment of the lower court.”

No breach of law in acquisition of seized Abuja properties -Emefiele

In the appeal, Emefiele equally based his argument on four grounds, while he maintained that he was dissatisfied with the entire judgement of the lower court.

Emefiele further contended that both the interim and final order as well as the entire proceedings before the lower court on the 753-uint housing estate are a nullity.

According to him, this is because everything during the court proceedings was predicated on conjectures, hearsay, and both of which are inadmissible.

The appellant stated in his appeal, that 鈥渢here is no law that was breached in the acquisition of those properties pursuant to which Section 44(2)(b)of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 17(1) of the Advance Fee Fraud, and other related offences act could be activated.

鈥淏oth the interim and final forfeiture orders were therefore, made in contravention of section 44(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and are therefore a nullity.鈥�

He also noted that throughout the grounds in support of the application he clearly showed his interest in both legal and equitable rights in the properties in dispute.

On pendency of appeal in appellate court

In further defence of Emefiele’s right to spiral the court judgement, A.O.M. Adebowale, his co-counsel, in a letter dated May 26, 2025, and addressed to the Minister of the Federal Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, drew the Minister鈥檚 attention to a pending appeal regarding the disputed properties, in Abuja.

In the letter, Adebowale also urged the Minister to refrain from taking any further action on the properties until Emefiele’s appeal is heard.

The co-counsel stated: 鈥淲e write to bring to your notice the pendency of our appeal at the court of appeal, Abuja, following the judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, sitting at Apo, delivered by his lordship J.O. Onwuegbuize on April 28.

鈥淲e have become aware of the handing over of the properties, which are the subject matter of the pending appeal, to the Ministry of Works and Housing (sic) through the Honourable Minister for Works and Housing.

“We are further aware that the said properties will soon be made available to the general public for purchase via auction.”

The letter noted: 鈥淲e served the notice of appeal to the Legal Department of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission on May 2, 2025, and subsequently, served a notice of injunction on 22 may 2025.

鈥淚n light of the foregoing, we write to bring the pendency of our appeal to your notice and request that further actions on the subject matter of the appeal be stayed pending the hearing of the appeal.鈥�

Kindly Share This Story