Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed October 23 for the hearing in a suit filed by the former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke, challenging the propriety of her assets forfeiture.
Justice Ekwo fixed the date on Wednesday after the lawyers to Diezani, Benson Igbanoi, and that of the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC), M.D. Baraya, regularised their processes in the suit.
Diezani, who served as the petroleum minister between 2010 and 2015 under the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan, is challenging an order obtained by the EFCC for the final forfeiture of her seized assets.
The suspended chairman of the EFCC, Abdulrasheed Bawa, revealed that $153million and over 80 properties had been recovered from Diezani.
She was alleged to have escaped to the United Kingdom and remained there after her exit from public office.
But the ex-minister, in an application filed on January 6 by her lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), sought an order extending the time within which to seek leave to apply to the 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 filed against the EFCC, Diezani is asking the court to hold that the various court orders made against her were made without jurisdiction and “ought to be set aside.”
The former Petroleum Resources Minister also claimed that she was not given a fair hearing in all the proceedings leading to the orders.
Diezani is also seeking for these prayers:
“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 (EFCC) 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.”
But the EFCC in a counter affidavit by a detective with the commission, Rufai Zakj, urged the court to dismiss Diezani’s application.
He said, contrary to Diezani’s deposition in the affidavit in support, 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.”
He added that the courts differently ordered the commission to do a newspaper publication inviting parties to show cause why the said property should not be forfeited to the Federal Government before final orders were made.
Zaki also said investigations had clearly shown that she was involved in some acts of criminality, which led to her charge, arguing that the disposal of the properties followed due process of law.
