News360 Nigeria: Timely, True and Balanced Reporting Platform
Connect with us

Crime and Law

Court overturns forfeiture decision on property worth N725 million linked to former NIMASA chairman Akpobolokemi

Published

on

A Federal High Court in Lagos has overturned an interim forfeiture order imposed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on assets linked to Dr. Patrick Akpobolokemi, former Director General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA).

The trial judge in this case is Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke.

On April 3, 2023, the court granted the EFCC’s petition exparte and ordered the interim forfeiture of property located at Plot No J37A Close, 2nd Avenue, Banana Island, Ikoyi, Lagos, as well as N725,345,897.77.

The properties were said to belong to a Real Estate firm, Boloboloere Properties & Estates Limited, while the money, N725.345 million, is said to belong to another company, Onyeinteke Global Network.

Justice Ringim had granted the order of the interim forfeiture.

However, the two firms, Boloboloere Properties & Estates Limited and Onyeinteke Global Network Limited, through their lawyer, A. Labi-Lawal, challenged the order.

Labi-Lawal argued the EFCC concealed material fact that Boloboloere had been discharged on all counts bordering on allegations of money laundering brought against it in Charge No: FHC/L/31C/2015: Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Dr. Parick Apobolokemi and 10 others.

He argued that the EFCC had failed to show or demonstrate how the Boloboloere’s property was purchased from proceeds of unlawful activities.

He urged the court to set aside and/or discharge the interim orders of the court made on April 3, 2023, forfeiting in the interim to the Federal Government of Nigeria, the property lying and situate at Piot J, 37B Close, 2nd Avenue, Banana Island, Ikoyi in Lagos.

He argued that notwithstanding the respondent’s full knowledge of the discharge of the applicant from all criminal liabilities in the charge, the respondent (EFCC) deliberately and to mislead this court, failed and refused to disclose the existence of the decision in Charge No: FHC/L/31C/2015 to this Honourable Court.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *