Lagos – The former first lady, Mrs. Patience Jonathan, Tuesday, begged a Lagos Federal High Court to unfreeze her accounts to the tune $8.4m and N7.4 billion in the nation’s commercial banks.
The former first lady, through her counsel, Justice Mojisola Olatoregun argued passionately why embargo placed on the accounts should be lifted.
It would be recalled that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had on April 20, through an exparte application, obtained an interim forfeiture of the said monies.
In the suit, EFCC joined as respondents: Patience Jonathan, Globus Integrated Services Limited, Finchley Top Homes Limited., Am-Pm Global Network Limited, Pagmat Oil and Gas Limited and Magel Resort Limited and Esther Oba.
When the case was called on Monday, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo announced appearance for the EFCC,while Mr Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN) appeared for the first respondent.
Mr Gboyega Oyewole (SAN) appeared for the second respondent, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) appeared for the third to sixth respondents, and Mr Ige Asemudara appeared for the seventh respondent.
After respondent counsel had moved their various motions for regularisation of processes, the court asked the applicant to move his motion for final forfeiture.
Oyedepo, in his application, informed the court that the application for final forfeiture dated May 8, seeking an order of the Court for a final forfeiture of the sums of money listed in the application.
Arguing his processes in opposition dated July 24, Mr Adedipe, counsel to first respondent, prayed the court to turn down the application for final forfeiture on the grounds that sufficient facts had not been placed before the court to warrant a final order.
According to Adedipe, the subject matter of the case was that it found monies in the account of the first respondent, which it said are reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
He argued that same respondent was neither invited by the commission, charged nor even prosecuted.
He added that the applicant failed to take these preliminary steps but rather headed straight to seek for an order of forfeiture.
He said that such practice fell short of prosecutorial procedures.
He argued that the depositions by the applicant that the funds represented proceeds of unlawful activities, has not been substantiated, as section 36 of the constitution provides that a person shall not be convicted of an offence, unless the offence is defined and punishment prescribed.
He explained that there is no crime known as “statutory suspicion” and so, the onus rests on the EFCC to prove that the respondent has such amount of money, and that same was obtained under false pretences or fraud.
He said that although there are depositions that the funds were obtained from “Women for Change” and Bola Shagaya, there are however, no evidences before the court to show that the funds were stolen.
According to him, that the application against the respondent is vindictive, and urged the court not to allow it to be used as a vehicle for pressure and injustice.
Counsel representing third to sixth respondent, (Ozekhome), argued that in line with the provisions of the Advanced Fee Fraud Act, the applicant’s motion for final forfeiture is premature, as the affidavit of the third respondent to show cause, has not been taken.
He said it is only when the same has been argued, and the court finds no merit in it, that the applicant can be justified and better placed to bring such final application.
According to him, the third to sixth respondents filed affidavits to show cause, deposed to by one Ubong, with exhibit attached labelled F1 to F6.
He said that these exhibits shows that the third respondent is a company, shows its certificate of incorporation, its board resolution that Patience Jonathan be made a signatory to it, and bank document evidencing that company’s account are signed by other persons who are also signatories.
Ozekhome further told the court that the third respondent makes money from selling items such as grocery, drinks, lightening among others, adding that exhibit F5 shows video clip evidence of various outfits, legitimately run by third respondent.
He prayed the court that the said video exhibit be allowed to be displayed in the open court, adding that exhibit F6 also shows manuals, catalogues, and hand bills, which also shows the legitimate ongoing concern of the third respondent.
He said: “It is trite, that whoever alleges, must prove, and on our part, we have proved that we are entitled to this money they seek to forfeit; so, the onus is on them to show otherwise,”
Mr. Ige Asemudara, counsel to the seventh defendant, Esther Oba, also told the court that the EFCC suppressed material fact before obtaining the order.
He told the court that his client has honoured EFCC’s invitation on several occasions and she will still attend one soon. This and many other steps taking by his client in claiming the money, he said the EFCC never told the court before obtaining the interim freezing order.
He prayed to lift the embargo placed on her client’s account Justice Olatoregun adjourned the case until November 13, for the respondent to properly apply and exhibit its video evidence before the court. Thereafter the EFCC will reply respond.
The post Patience Jonathan, Others Want Court To Lift Embargo On Accounts appeared first on Independent Newspapers Nigeria.
Source: Daily Independent
We appreciate you for reading our post, but we think it will be better you like our facebook fanpage and also follow us on twitter below.