The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, Wednesday, set aside the judgment of Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court Abuja refusing the final forfeiture application of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), in respect of the sums of $500,000 and N500m allegedly looted from the Zamfara state’s share of the Paris Club refunds made by the federal government to the 36 states.
A press statement by the Head, Media and Publicity, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Wilson Uwujaren, said “Justice Dimgba had on June 30, 2017 ordered the interim forfeiture of the monies following an ex parte application by the EFCC.
“However, the judge on November 17, 2017, refused the Commission’s application for an Order of final forfeiture of the money to the Federal Government. Citing contestation regarding the illicit origin of the money, the judge had ruled that it would be“an unjust, inequitable and irresponsible exercise” of his judicial powers under Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud Act to gloss over the claims and go ahead to make the final forfeiture order.
“I do not believe that this provision should be available where the absolute forfeiture of the funds or the funds itself are subject of a significant contest as it is in the circumstances of the present case,” the judge ruled.
According to the Spokesperson, “Dissatisfied by the ruling, the EFCC approached the appellate court to side aside the judgment.
“In a unanimous Judgment delivered by Justice S.J Adah on behalf of a panel of three justices, other being Justices A.A Adume and B.I Ghafai, the Court of Appeal nullified the judgment of Justice Dimgba.
“Justice Adah held that the trial judge misconstrued section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud Act 2006 and did not evaluate the facts brought by the appellants, that the funds are proceeds of illegality and criminally diverted from a legitimate source.
“The judge noted that the money has become illegitimate and cannot be used to pay any legitimate contract for public services.
“The judgment of the lower court cannot stand and will never be allowed to stand,” the court ruled.
