The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the permanent forfeiture of $49,700 to the Nigerian government, allegedly recovered from Dr. Nura Ali, former Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for Sokoto State.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Emeka Nwite, followed an application by Osuobeni Akponimisingha, counsel to the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC).
Akponimisingha stated that the ICPC had complied with the court’s earlier interim order for temporary forfeiture and published a notice inviting interested parties to show cause why the funds shouldn’t be permanently forfeited.
Since no one came forward to claim the money, the court granted the ICPC’s request, deeming the application meritorious. The $49,700 was reportedly seized from Ali’s Kano residence, suspected to be bribe money received during his tenure as Sokoto State REC in the 2023 general elections.
In his ruling, according to the News Agency of Nigeria, Justice Nwite held that the application by the lawyer was meritorious.
“I have listened to the submission of the learner counsel to applicant and I have also gone through the affidavit evidence.
“I am of the view that the application is meritorious.
“Consequently, the application is granted,” the judge ruled.
Justice Nwite had, on Dec. 30, 2024, ordered the temporary forfeiture of the seized funds, after the lawyer moved the ex-parte motion.
While the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) was the applicant, Ali was the sole respondent in the motion ex-parte marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1846/2024.
The motion, dated Dec. 20, 2024 and filed Dec. 24, 2024, was jointly filed by the ICPC and the Department of State Service (DSS).
Mr Usman Dauda, the Director of Legal, signed the application on DSS’ behalf, and Akponimisingha, Assistant Chief Legal Officer in ICPC, was part of the legal team that drafted the process.
The motion sought an order of the court temporarily forfeiting the sum of $49,700.00 (forty-nine thousand, seven hundred dollars), “recovered from one Dr. Nura Ali during a search operation by the Federal Government of Nigeria being property suspected to be proceed of an unlawful activity.”
It also sought an order directing the applicant i.e., the FRN, through the ICPC and the DSS, to jointly conduct a thorough preliminary investigation into the alleged unlawful activities of Ali, in respect of the moveable property sought to be forfeited and make a report to the court within 90 days.
It sought an order directing the applicant i.e., FRN, through the ICPC and the DSS, to deposit the 49,700.00 dollars in an escrow account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
The application equally sought an order directing the applicant to publish a notice in any national newspaper calling for persons whether, human, juristic or artificial, having Interest in the money to show cause why it should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
Giving nine grounds why the application should be granted, the applicant said the victim of the alleged crime was the Federal Government of Nigeria and innocent taxpayers which include judges of courts across the country.
It said the money was recovered during a search operation by operatives of the DSS at the residence of Ali.
“The alleged moveable property of $49,700.00 was bribe money received by Dr Nura Ali when he was the Independent National Electoral Commission’s Resident Electoral Commissioner for Sokoto State.
“The alleged moveable property is not the legitimate earning of Dr Ali as independent National Electoral Commission’s Resident Electoral Commissioner.
“The alleged moveable property is suspected to be proceed of crime,” it said.
The applicant argued that INEC does not pay its staff members with United States Dollar as salaries or allowances.
It said the essence of the application was not to compulsorily acquire the alleged moveable property from the alleged owner, but to preserve the property from dissipation.
It said if the court grants the reliefs sought, interested persons including the alleged owner will be given opportunity to offer an explanation as to the legitimacy of the alleged property.
“Where cogent and verifiable explanation exists as to how the property was acquired, devoid of crime, the alleged owner or any other person having proprietary interest in the property will be allowed unrestricted possession of the property.
“This application is not in conflict with the provisions of Sections 43 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which guarantee the rights of citizens of Nigeria to acquire and own immoveable and moveable properties in any part of Nigeria,” it said.
It would be recalled that Akponimisingha, who appeared for the FRN, had told the court that the motion ex-parte prayed the court for four orders.
The lawyer said four exhibits were attached to the motion, including Exhibit DSS 1 to Exhibit DSS 4.
Leave a Reply