Yesterday, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) got a court order to seize an estate containing 753 units of duplexes in Abuja.
It is the commission’s single-largest asset recovery. But the identity of the estate promoter remained unknown last night.
It was learnt that a final security clearance would be required to disclose the estate owner, who is described as a “former top government official”.
The application was filed by the EFCC without disclosing the identity of the top brass.
A source said: “Even in the affidavit sworn to in the court, the identity of the owner was not mentioned. I think the forfeiture agreement clause by the EFCC and the owner was not to name the affected person.
“Sometimes during sensitive cases, you determine whether you want the assets or the owner. In this case, the EFCC opted for the assets.”
According to a statement by the Head of Media and Publicity of the EFCC, Mr. Dele Oyewale, the estate is located in the Lokogoma area of Abuja.
He said Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie gave the ruling on a final forfeiture of an estate in Abuja measuring 150,500 square-metre and containing 753 units of duplexes and other apartments.
He said: “This is the single largest asset recovery by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) since its inception in 2003.
“The Estate rests on Plot 109 Cadastral Zone C09, Lokogoma District, Abuja.”
On how the anti-graft agency secured the forfeiture of the duplexes, Oyewale said: “The forfeiture of the property to the federal government by a former top brass of the government was pursuant to EFCC’s mandate and policy directive of ensuring that the corrupt and fraudulent do not enjoy the proceeds of their unlawful activities.
“In this instance, the Commission relied on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud And Other Fraud Related Offences Act No 14, 2006 and Section 44 (2) B of the Constitution of the 199 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to push its case.
“Ruling on the commission’s application for the final forfeiture of the property, Justice Onwuegbuzie held that the respondent have not shown cause as to why he should not lose the property, which has been reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities, the property is hereby finally forfeited to the federal government.”
