Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Apo, Abuja, on Monday, dismissed an application by former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele, seeking to reclaim a sprawling estate of 753 duplexes and apartments in Abuja.
The estate, located at Plot 109, Cadastral Zone CO9, Lokogoma District, spans 150,462.84 square metres.
It was previously secured through an interim and later a final forfeiture order obtained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in favour of the Federal Government.
Although the property was initially recovered from an unnamed former senior government official, Emefiele, through his lawyer, A.M. Kotoye (SAN), filed a motion as an interested party, seeking an extension of time to challenge the forfeiture orders made on December 2 and December 24, 2024.
Emefiele argued that he was unaware of the proceedings, alleging that the EFCC had published the interim forfeiture notice in an “obscure” section of The PUNCH newspaper, making it difficult for him to respond.
He also contended that, during the relevant period, he was standing trial in three different criminal cases across courts in Abuja and Lagos, hindering his ability to discover the notice in time.
Further, he accused the EFCC of deliberately concealing the forfeiture process despite ongoing engagements with him over other charges.
In his ruling, Justice Onwuegbuzie noted that although the principle of functus officio was raised, a court retains limited powers to review its decisions where justified.
However, he held that the notice requirements under Section 17(2) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, had been properly met.
The judge rejected Emefiele’s claim that the publication was obscure, stating, “A half-page publication in a national daily like The PUNCH cannot reasonably be described as hidden.”
Justice Onwuegbuzie further emphasised that only persons who can demonstrate a legally recognisable interest in a forfeited property may seek to intervene, citing principles similar to joinder rules in civil litigation.
Concluding, he held that Emefiele had more than the required 14 days to contest the forfeiture but failed to act.
The motion was dismissed, with the court resolving the sole issue in favour of the EFCC.