Connect with us

News

Diezani fights back! Demands return of properties in suit against EFCC

Published

on

Diezani Alison-Madueke, Nigeria’s former Minister of Petroleum has launched an intensive legal battle to regain her multi-million money worth properties seized last year by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which had been on her case since she exited office in 2015.

Last year, the EFCC had obtained a final forfeiture of properties in Nigeria and abroad allegedly linked to the Bayelsa-born former Minister, believed to be one of the most influential personalities in the government of former President, Goodluck Jonathan.

Alison-Madueke, who had since relocated to London, where she has been living, since the anti-graft commission launched efforts to get her answer questions over some infractions in office, began what is seen as a fight back, in a suit she filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja through Mike Ozekhome (SAN), her lawyer demanding, among others, an order extending the time within which to seek leave to apply to the court for an order to set aside the public notice issued by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to conduct the public sale on her property.

Stating that the motion intended to halt the notice recently issued by the EFCC for disposal of forfeited assets, some of which included those belonging to her, she noted, in a supporting affidavit, that the EFCC planned to conduct a public sale of all forfeited, beginning from January 9 as contained in its public notice following various court judgments/orders issued in favour of the commission as final forfeiture orders against property and personal effects linked to her.

In the motion, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023, in which she is seeking five reliefs, she argued among others that she was not heard before the orders for forfeiture were issued, thereby denying her the right to fair hearing.

Stressing that the forfeiture orders made in respect of assets linked with her were issued by the various courts without jurisdiction, she said: “The various court orders issued in favour of the respondent (EFCC) and upon which the respondent issued the public notice to conduct public sale of items contained in the public notice, most of which affect the interest of the applicant, were issued in breach of the applicant’s right to fair hearing as guaranteed by Section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, as altered, and other similar constitutional provisions.”

Besides, she notified the court that she was neither served with the charge sheet and proof of evidence in any of the charges nor any other summons howsoever and whatsoever in respect of the criminal charges pending against her before the court, adding that the courts were misled into making several of the final forfeiture orders against her assets through suppression or non-disclosure of material facts.

“The several applications, upon which the courts made the final order of forfeiture against the applicant, were obtained upon gross misstatements, misrepresentations, non-disclosure, concealment and suppression of material facts.

“The orders were made without recourse to the constitutional right to fair hearing and right to property accorded the applicant by the constitution. The applicant was never served with the processes of court in all the proceedings that led to the order of final forfeiture,” the court papers, said.

But in its counter affidavit, the EFCC faulted her arguments, noting that, not only was she represented in some of the proceedings, publications were made in the media to alert interested parties about pending forfeiture applications.

An EFCC official, Rufai Zaki, who claimed to be part of the team that investigated a case of criminal conspiracy, official corruption and money laundering against her and some others involved in the case, said investigation showed that she was involved in some acts of criminality.

Zaki stated that, following the findings of his team, Mrs. Alison-Madueke was charged before the Federal High court in a charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018.

“We hereby rely on the charge FHC/ABJ/CR/208/2018 dated 14th November, 2018 filed before this honourable court and also attached as Exhibit C in the applicant’s affidavit,” he said, adding that contrary to the ex-Minister’s claims, most of the cases leading to the final forfeiture of the contested property “were action in rem, same were heard at various times and determined by the court.”

He said the courts differently ordered the commission to do newspaper publications, inviting interested parties to show cause why the said property should not be forfeited to the Federal Government before final orders were made, recalling that one Nnamdi Awa Kalu represented the ex-minister in the hearing of one of such forfeiture applications.

He added that not only was the order for the forfeiture of the effected properties made since 2017, and was not set aside on appeal, the assets in question have since been disposed of through due process of law.

At the mention of the case on Monday, the lawyer to Mrs. Alison-Madueke Oluchi Uche, told the court that her client was served EFFC’s response (counter affidavit) to her client’s motion last Friday. Uche urged the court to allow her client adequate time to respond to the counter affidavit.

EFCC’s lawyer, Farouk Abdullah, did not oppose, following which Justice Inyang Ekwo adjourned till May 8 for hearing.

News

Speak now! Catholic priests want Kaduna gov’s reaction to El-Rufai’s Islamisation comments

Published

on

Uba Sani, must either officially distance himself or affirm the declaration of his predecessor Nasir El-Rufai that Muslim-Muslim executive branch leadership, have come to stay or stand up to denounce it immediately.

These were the demands from Catholic priests in parts of the North, who as they expressed disgust at the statement, which showed the former governor captured in a video, which went viral last week, practically celebrating the continuation of an arrangement, which he first introduced in 2019, and which has now been sustained with the new governor having a Muslim deputy.

Clerics from Kaduna, Kafanchan and Zaria chapters of the Nigerian Catholic Diocesan Priests Association (NCDPA), in a public letter to Sani, urged him to declare his position on what they described as political supremacism in Kaduna state and Nigeria, as part of their reactions to the video, which has raised a lot of dust.

El-Rufai, who in his speech to Muslim clerics in the state, had recounted how after instituting an all-Muslim executive in the state himself and made it permanent in the state, the arrangement was pushed through at the national level with the election of Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Kashim Shettima, as President and Vice President, respectively on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Informing that while Nigerians were actually believed that religion was not the issue in pushing through with the ticket, when it was in fact the case, the former Governor, who spoke in Hausa, declared that the arrangement had come to stay and would last for the next 20 years at the initial stage after Tinubu, adding that the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), had been defeated by the outcome.

But an apparently thoroughly upset Catholic priests, in an open letter on Thursday, said: “Having soberly considered the contents and implications of such communication by a former state governor who is known to be your close ally, we feel compelled to write you, to know where you stand with regard to the commotions Mallam El-Rufai intends to propagate and perpetuate in our state,” the letter reads.

“We write you today because we are responsible stakeholders in the affairs of our beloved state with our own congregations and followers. Mr governor, we do not intend to conclude that you are in agreement with all the content of the former governor’s utterances, as you have given no explicit reason to suggest so (yet), even though you were present at the occasion! We therefore earnestly expect your direct official reaction to the utterances of your predecessor in office.”

Continue Reading

News

Buhari spent more than $19billion on revamping four refineries without result – Nasarawa gov

Published

on

Barely two weeks after his exit, the records of former President Muhammadu Buhari, have come to to the fore with one of them indicating a damning verdict, as he was said to have sunk a whopping $19billion in trying to rehabilitate the nation’s four refineries, without anything to show for it.

Abdullahi Sule, Governor of Nassarawa State, who used the former President abysmal failure to make a case for supporting the removal on petroleum products, compared the huge wastage to the amount Dangote refinery, cost to give Nigeria a facility with the single chain production in the world.

None of Nigeria’s four refineries, located in Kaduna, Port Harcourt, and Warri is currently operational despite the huge amount sunk to resuscitate them, most of the funds borrowed from foreign lending agencies, the latest being the securing of $1.5million loan for that of Port Harcourt.

Bemoaning the situation, the governor, said: “Look at how much the President Buhari administration spent on fixing the refineries. In the eight years, he spent more money than the $19 billion that Dangote spent in building a refinery. That is one and a half times the size of our three refineries combined.”

A guest on Sunrise Daily, a breakfast programm of Channels Television on Thursday, Sule, pinned the payments of subsidy on Nigeria’s non-functional refineries, adding: “From the government side, I think we didn’t do a good job. When the (former) President (Buhari) came in in 2015, prices of crude oil dropped by less than 30 dollars. At that time, there was zero subsidy.

“Our three refineries in Nigeria today have a total of 450,000 barrels per day, Dangote is 650,000. He spent $19 billion on building it. We spent, not building a new one, but in maintaining these refineries; more than $19 billion in eight years, yet they have not been maintained.”

The Dangote Refinery, Africa’s biggest oil refinery, which took off in 2017, drew Nigerians and global personalities in different fields of life, including four African Presidents at its commissioning on May 22, 2023 by Buhari.

Sule, who also lamented the complexity of maintaining the refineries due to their diverse components, added: “The refinery is actually a component for water, crude, and diesel, about five or six different components that constitute a refinery. The moment the government says we are going to spend $2 billion this year on the refinery. The $2 billion is spent and as far as the President is concerned, they have given $2 billion.

“Now when it goes to the three refineries that we have in Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna. Then they say, you now take $700 million, you now take $800 million – by the time they take that, it goes to fix maybe only one component out of the four components that are all bad. The ideal resolve would have been to allocate the major funds to one of the refining states to fix it totally before allocating the remainder to the other states.

“So, zero work is done. These are the true realities of what is happening, and that is why none of the refineries is working. These are truly the problem, we have not really managed this thing well.”

Continue Reading

News

Japan goes tough on asylum seekers, enacts new law to check abuse

Published

on

Despite desperate attempts to block it, including a ruckus, which broke out in parliament Japan went ahead on Friday to enact an immigration law that would see the government deporting failed asylum seekers, even with members of civil society, joining in the pushback.

The law gives refugees only three chances to try after which they would face deportation, unlike before when applicants could stay in Japan during the decision process, regardless of the number of attempts they made to secure refugee status, reports, say.

The revised law will “protect those who must be protected while strictly dealing with people who have violated rules. There are many people who misuse the application system to avoid deportation,” Justice Minister Ken Saito, was quoted as saying, adding that this had persisted even when such people were not fleeing danger or persecution.

Last year, Japan accepted just 202 refugees out of some 12,500 applicants, and separately allowed 1,760 people to remain in the country due to “humanitarian considerations,” including more than 2,400 evacuees from Ukraine under a different framework.

Activists staged rallies against the revised law, but a protest from the opposition bloc in parliament was voted down by the ruling coalition, which holds a commanding majority.

“It is intolerable to deport people, even if they have criminal records, to countries that may violate their human rights” and where “their life and freedom would be in danger”, the Tokyo Bar Association said this week.

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party says the revisions will bring better access to medical care and accommodation options for people whose asylum applications are pending.

Japan’s immigration detention conditions have been under scrutiny since the 2021 death of Wishma Sandamali, a 33-year-old Sri Lankan woman.

Sandamali was not an asylum seeker but had been held for overstaying her visa after seeking police protection, reportedly to escape an abusive relationship.

Her family are seeking compensation of more than $1 million from the government over her death.

Sandamali reportedly complained repeatedly of stomach pain and other symptoms, and campaigners allege she received inadequate medical care.

Controversy and political pressure over the incident led ruling lawmakers to drop a push to enact similar legal changes to immigration rules two years ago.

Shoichi Ibusuki, a lawyer for Sandamali’s family, told AFP on Thursday that the revised bill was “equivalent to having a button to execute those who seek refuge by deporting them”.

“Japan’s refugee recognition system is not working,” he said, with officials turning down applications quickly, sometimes without face-to-face interviews.

Amnesty International also said in March that Japan should scrap the proposed revision to immigration laws, calling the country’s detention policies “harsh” and “repressive.”

Continue Reading

Trending