Why EFCC Concealed Identity of Forfeited Abuja Estate’s Owner
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has responded to criticism for concealing the identity of the owner of the vast Abuja estate forfeited to the federal government on Monday.
EFCC, Nigeria’s leading anti-corruption agency, had secured the final forfeiture of the estate in Abuja, the largest single-asset recovery since the agency’s inception in 2003.
The commission achieved this through an order of final forfeiture issued by a court in Abuja Monday.
The recovered asset is a vast estate in Abuja measuring 150,500 square metres with 753 units of duplexes and other apartments.
But EFCC refused to disclose its owner in jts statement announcing the unprecedented asset recovery on Monday.
But in a statement on Tuesday, Mr. Dele Oyewale, the spokesperson for the EFCC condemned the allegation of cover-up of the owner of the estate levelled against it by Omowole Sowore, Sahara Reporters publisher.
Sowore had said despite EFCC’s deliberate effort to conceal the owner’s details, he found that the asset belonged to Godwin Emefiele, the embattled former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
But Oyewale described Sowore’s allegation as “unacceptable and grossly un-charitable.”
“It is shocking that the activist (Sowore) is not concerned about the systemic lassitude and unhelpful permissiveness that allowed such a monstrous corrupt act in the first instance,” he wrote.
Defending the agency’s decision not to disclose the details of the owner of the estate, Oyewale said the identity of the owner could not be revealed because investigation into the suspected criminality in the acquisition of the property is ongoing.
Oyewale explained that the company suspected as the owner denied ownership of the estate.
“On the basis of this, the Commission approached the Court for an order of final forfeiture which Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, High Court granted on Monday, 2 December, 2024,” the spokesperson said.
“It is important to note that the substantive criminal investigation on the matter still continues. It will be unprofessional of the EFCC to go to town by mentioning names of individuals whose identities were not directly linked to any title document of the properties.”
He also highlighted the process leading to the forfeiture.
“The proceedings for the forfeiture of the estate were in line with Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud Act which is a civil proceeding that allows for action-in-rem rather than action-in-personam.
“The latter allows legal actions against a property and not an individual, especially in a situation of an unclaimed property. This Act allows you to take up a forfeiture proceeding against a chattel that is not a juristic person. This is exactly what the Commission did in respect of the Estate,” Oyewale said in the statement.
