The Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission is set to file an application in court seeking the total
forfeiture of $15,591,700, belonging to Dame Patience Jonathan, the wife
of the immediate past President, Goodluck Jonathan.
The money is currently lodged in the
Skye Bank account of four companies: Pluto Property and Investment
Company Limited; Seagate Property Development & Investment Company
Limited; Trans Ocean Property and Investment Company Limited and Avalon
Global Property Development Company Limited.
The EFCC had frozen the four accounts,
which were linked to a former Special Adviser to the President on
Domestic Affairs, Waripamowei Dudafa.
However, Jonathan’s wife had claimed in a
sworn affidavit that the money in the four accounts belonged to her
even though there is no paper evidence to establish a link between her
and the companies.
She also urged the court to compel the EFCC to lift the restriction on the accounts.
In a sudden twist, however, the
anti-graft agency arraigned the four companies on Thursday and the
companies pleaded guilty to money laundering charges.
A senior EFCC official told one of our
correspondents that the anti-graft agency would subsequently apply for
the total forfeiture of the funds.
He said, “The four companies, in whose
accounts the monies were lodged, have pleaded guilty to money
laundering. We are therefore filing an application, seeking the complete
and total forfeiture of the money to the Federal Government.
“The $15,591,700 should go (be deposited in) into the Treasury Single Account of the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
On Thursday, the four accused companies
pleaded guilty to conspiring with Dudafa; a lawyer, Amajuoyi Briggs; and
a banker, Adedamola Bolodeoku, to launder the sum of $15, 591,700 on or
about November 13, 2013.
The EFCC, while arraigning the seven
accused persons before a Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday,
admitted to the court that the $15.6m were proceeds of theft.
Though Dudafa, Briggs and Bolodeoku
pleaded not guilty to the amended 15 counts pressed against them by the
EFCC, the four companies, charged along with them, owned up to
committing the offence.
The guilty plea was entered on behalf of
Pluto, Seagate, Trans Ocean and Avalon by one Friday Davies, Agbo Baro,
Bioghowri Frederick and Taiwo Ebenezer, respectively.
The EFCC had since frozen the $15.6m
found in the four companies’ accounts with Skye Bank Plc by placing a
‘No Debit Order’ on the four accounts.
But Patience had filed a fundamental
rights enforcement suit against the EFCC and the bank, claiming that the
money, which the EFCC said were proceeds of theft, belonged to her.
Patience is also seeking damages against
Skye Bank in the sum of N200m for what she termed a violation of her
right to own personal property under Section 44 of the 1999
Constitution.
But Patience’s suit against the EFCC and Skye Bank has yet to be heard by any judge.
However, the EFCC arraigned Dudafa,
Briggs, Bolodeoku and the four companies before Justice Babs Kuewumi on
Thursday for money laundering and conspiring to retain proceeds of
theft.
The EFCC also alleged that the seven
accused persons conspired to forge Skye Bank mandate cards, purporting
that they were signed by Friday Davies, Kola Fredrick, Taiwo Ebenezer
and Agbo Baro, to prejudice Skye Bank in their bid to launder the
$15.6m.
They were also accused of forging a Wema
Bank Corporate Account mandate card, purporting that it was signed by
Taiwo Ebenezer and Chima John to prejudice Wema Bank.
The EFCC prosecutor, Rotimi Oyedepo,
told Justice Kuewumi that Dufada, Briggs, Bolodeoku and the four
companies acted contrary to Section 1(2)(c) of the Miscellaneous
Offences Act, Cap. M17, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
But while the four companies pleaded guilty, Dudafa, Briggs and Bolodeoku maintained that they did not commit the offence.
Following the guilt plea by the
companies, Oyedepo told the court that he would like to review the facts
of the case by tendering documents to prove the offence, for the court
to decide their fate but Justice Kuewumi said he would only entertain
the review of facts at a later date.
The lawyers, who appeared for Briggs and
Bolodeoku, Tochukwu Onuike and Joseph Okobiemen, respectively,
subsequently informed the court that they had filed applications for the
bail of their clients, urging Justice Kuewumi to admit their clients to
bail in liberal terms.
However, Dudafa’s lawyer, Gboyega
Oyewole, said he did not file any application for his client’s bail in
the hope that Justice Kuewumi would allow the accused person to continue
to enjoy a N500m bail granted him in another criminal case before
Justice Mohammed Idris of the same court.
Justice Kuewumi, however, turned down
Oyewole’s prayer, saying the case before Justice Idris was different
from the one before him.
He directed the lawyer to file a formal application for Dudafa’s bail.
The judge, however, granted Briggs and Bolodeoku a N250m bail each with one surety each in like sum.
The accused were directed to deposit their passports in the court’s custody pending the conclusion of their trial.
The sureties, the court said, must be
resident in Lagos and must be owners of landed property in any highbrow
area, the Certificate of Occupancy of which they were to deposit with
the court.
The sureties were also to show evidence of tax payment.
The court adjourned till September 27, 2016 for commencement of trial.
In the suit filed by Patience, laying
claim to the $15m, which is the subject of prosecution of Dudafa and
others, one Sammie Somiari, who deposed to an affidavit on behalf of
Patience, claimed that Dudafa helped Patience to open the bank accounts
in 2010.
According to him, Dudafa had, on March 22, 2010, brought two Skye Bank officials to meet Patience at home to open five accounts.
The deponent claimed that Patience was the sole signatory to the accounts.
He, however, claimed that after the five
accounts were opened, Patience later discovered that Dudafa opened only
one of the accounts in her name while the other four were opened in the
names of companies belonging to Dudafa.
Somiari added, “The applicant (Patience)
complained about this to Honourable Dudafa, who, at his prompting and
instance, promised to effect the change of the said accounts to the
applicant’s name; and to effect this change, Honourable Dudafa brought
the said bank manager, Mr. Dipo Oshodi, who purported to have effected
the changes. This was about April 2014.
“The applicant is not a director, shareholder or participant in the companies named in the aforementioned four accounts.
“The bank official, Mr. Dipo Oshodi, as
it would appear, did not effect or reflect the instruction of the
applicant to change the said accounts to her name despite repeated
requests of the applicant.”
In her reaction to the court proceedings
on Thursday, Patience said the four accused persons, who pleaded guilty
to money laundering charges on behalf of the four companies linked her,
were mercenaries hired by the EFCC.
The ex-President’s wife stated this in a statement on Thursday by her media aide, Chima Osuji.
She alleged that the EFCC presented four
unknown persons, who were not authorised by the companies’ boards, to
plead guilty on behalf of the companies.
She said it was a ploy by the EFCC to ensure that her hard-earned money was confiscated.
The ex-President’s wife argued that the
EFCC failed to comply with Section 477 (2) of the Administration of
Criminal Justice Act, 2015, by not presenting to the court on Thursday
any letter to show that the four persons were authorised by the
companies to represent them.
Patience added, “This is a clear
evidence of the desperation of the prosecution to pull down the former
First Lady and confiscate her hard-earned money.
“It is an irony that it was the former
First Lady who went to court for the repatriation of her confiscated
money when she realised that the EFCC and its co-travellers were playing
politics with this issue after she had come out publicly to say that
the said money belonged to her and that she had all evidence to prove
the sources of her money.
“Up until this very moment, the EFCC has refused to interrogate or invite her for questioning.”
No comments:
Post a Comment