You are here
Home > HEADLINES > Patience Jonathan’s ally, Shagaya, loses bid to reclaim seized N1.9bn

Patience Jonathan’s ally, Shagaya, loses bid to reclaim seized N1.9bn

Patience Jonathan’s ally, Shagaya, loses bid to reclaim seized N1.9bn

Please follow and like us:

  • 0
  • Share

Oladimeji Ramon

The Federal High Court in Lagos has dismissed an application seeking to unfreeze a Unity Bank account with a balance of N1,902,673,399.93 belonging to Hajiya Bola Shagaya.

Justice Oluremi Oguntoyinbo, in a judgment on Thursday, threw out Shagaya’s application, declaring that it lacked merit.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had on December 29, 2016, obtained an interim order to freeze the account.

The anti-graft agency then told the court that the N1.9bn was the balance of a total of N3,305,150,000, which Shagaya received as “founder fees” on behalf of an organisation, “Women for Change” being spearheaded by a former First Lady, Mrs. Patience Jonathan.

Justice Muslim Hassan, who granted the order, said the account would remain frozen pending investigations by the EFCC.

Shagaya, through her lawyer, Mr. Napoleon Emeaso-Nwachukwu, however, approached Justice Oguntoyinbo, seeking to unfreeze the account.

Emeaso-Nwachukwu contended that his client was not given a fair hearing before the account was frozen.

He contended that the freezing order violated Shagaya’s right to own movable property under Section 44(1)(k) of the I999 Constitution.

He urged Justice Oguntoyinbo to declare Justice Hassan’s freezing order as “unconstitutional, null and void.”

READ ALSO: Anonymous buyer paid N85m for property linked to ex-NAF chief – Witness

But in her judgment on Thursday, Justice Oguntoyinbo dismissed Shagaya’s application, holding that Justice Hassan did not need to hear from her before freezing the account, since it was based on an ex parte application.

“The interim order was made based on an ex parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. An ex parte application has no respondent and the court is not expected to hear from the other party. Even when the other party is around, it can only be seen and not heard. Therefore, the failure of Justice Hassan to hear the applicant cannot invalidate the order.

“The granting of the interim order of attachment is not unconstitutional and does not constitute an infringement on the applicant’s rights to own property,” Justice Oguntoyinbo held.

The EFCC had, in opposition to Shagaya’s application, urged Justice Oguntoyinbo not to allow Shagaya to “use this honourable court as a shield against criminal investigation and prosecution.”

The anti-graft agency claimed that the N1.9bn was part of N3. 3bn, which Shagaya allegedly realised through “fraudulent activities in the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation,” where she allegedly “influenced the fraudulent allocation of Dual Purpose kerosene to Index Petrolube Africa Ltd., with the aid of the former First Lady, Mrs. Dame Patience Jonathan.”

Copyright PUNCH.
All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from PUNCH.

Contact: [email protected]

(Visited 48 times, 21 visits today)
Facebook Comments

Please follow and like us:

  • 0
  • Share

Leave a Reply