The Federal High Court, on Wednesday, fixed October 23 for the hearing in a suit filed by a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke.
Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed the date after Alison-Madueke’s counsel, Benson Igbanoi, and counsel for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, M.D. Baraya, regularised their processes in the suit.
The former minister is challenging an order obtained by the EFCC for the final forfeiture of her seized assets.
She served as the Minister of Petroleum under the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.
The EFCC, under its suspended Chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa, had claimed that $153 million and over 80 properties were recovered from the former minister.
It was alleged that she escaped to the United Kingdom and remained there after her exit from public office.
However, in a motion filed on January 6 by her lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, Alison-Madueke sought an order extending the time within which to seek leave to apply to court.
The extended time is sought for an order to set aside the EFCC’s public notice issued to conduct a public sale on her property.
In the suit in which Alison-Madueke is the applicant and the EFCC is the sole respondent, the former minister maintained that the various orders were made without jurisdiction and ought to be set aside, adding that she was not given a fair hearing in all the proceedings leading to the orders.
“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 various court orders issued in favour of the respondent and upon which the respondent issued the public notice 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.
“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 and this honourable court has the power to set aside same ex debito justitiae, as a void order is as good as if it was never made at all,” her lawyers said.
The EFCC, in a counter affidavit filed by Rufai Zakj, however, asked the court to dismiss the former minister’s application.
The Commission claimed that most of the cases that led to the final forfeiture of the contested property “were action in rem; the same was heard at various times and determined by this honourable court.”
