The Federal High Court in Abuja has set 2 July for a decision on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission's (EFCC) request for the final forfeiture of five more properties linked to Saleh Mamman. Mamman is a former Minister of Power who was sentenced in May to 75 years in prison for money laundering.
Judge James Omotosho announced the date after listening to arguments from EFCC lawyer Abbas Muhammed and Mamman's lawyer, Femi Atteh, who is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).
The properties in question include Walijam Apartments at No. 43 Plot 435, Lobito Crescent, Wuse 2, Abuja, and Bloom Luxury Suites Nigeria Limited at No. 5 Amana Crescent, New Estate, Unguwan Rimi, Kaduna State.
Other properties are a mansion at No. 11 Misratah Street, Wuse 2, Abuja; another mansion at No. 13 Misratah Street, Wuse 2, Abuja; and A.U.A Plaza at Plot 734 Kade Street, Wuse 2, Abuja.
The EFCC wants to add these properties to the list already ordered for forfeiture by the judge based on Mamman's conviction. In his judgement on 13 May, the judge ordered the final forfeiture of properties in prime areas of Abuja and different amounts recovered by the EFCC in various currencies.
The latest court application seeks to seize five more properties allegedly belonging to Mamman. During the proceedings, Mr Muhammed told the court that the EFCC had filed a motion for a final forfeiture order regarding these properties.
He stated that the motion was filed on 25 May and was served to the defence. On his part, Mr Atteh confirmed that they received the application and added that they had filed a counter affidavit.
Atteh argued that the court had no power to handle the forfeiture application since it had already ruled on the criminal case. He said that any move to forfeit the properties should be done through a different legal action.
He maintained that the court had become ‘functus officio,’ meaning its role in the criminal case ended with the judgement. He also mentioned that an appeal was filed to challenge Mamman's conviction.
EFCC disputes defence claims
In response, EFCC lawyer Mr Muhammed argued that the court still had the power to decide on the forfeiture application, despite Mamman's conviction. He pointed out that the court found that Mamman had stolen about N22 billion from a total of N33.8 billion involved in the charges.
Mr Muhammed stressed that the EFCC recovered less than N2 billion from Mamman, even after previous forfeiture orders. He insisted that the court had the authority to rule on the matter.
Regarding the appeal against Mamman's conviction, Mr Muhammed said it had not been entered yet, meaning no appeal number was assigned. He urged the court to take action and grant the forfeiture request.
Mr Atteh stood by the defence’s counter-affidavit filed on 5 June and asked the court to reject the EFCC's application. He argued that some properties belonged to people who were not part of the criminal trial.
He questioned whether these individuals were receiving fair treatment and cited legal precedents to support his claim that the court had completed its role in the case. He urged the judge to dismiss the application for lacking merit.
After hearing from both sides, Judge Omotosho adjourned the case until 2 July for a decision. The judge found Mamman guilty on all counts on 7 May and sentenced him on 13 May to 75 years in prison for laundering public funds.
The judge also issued a warrant for Mamman's arrest after he missed several court appearances, including during his sentencing. Following some investigations, EFCC operatives arrested him on 19 May at a hideout in Rigasa, Kaduna State.
They also arrested Shamsudeen Mohammed, a relative found with him. When the EFCC brought Mamman to court on 26 May, the judge ordered his detention at the Kuje Custodial Centre to start serving his sentence.
On that same day, the court set 8 June to hear the EFCC’s request for the forfeiture of five more properties tied to Mamman. The judge stated that this date was chosen to ensure fair hearing after learning that the defence lawyer, Mohammed Ahmed, left the courtroom without notifying anyone.
Affidavit calling judgement an 'emotional outburst' dismissed
Earlier, Mr Atteh asked for permission to address an affidavit filed on 22 May by a lawyer in his team, Mohammed Ahmed. The judge summoned Mr Ahmed on 10 June over this affidavit, which described the judgement convicting Mamman as an 'emotional outburst.'
This led Judge Omotosho to ask Mr Ahmed to explain his statements. On Wednesday, Mr Atteh apologized to the court on behalf of the lawyer. He said he was not present when the affidavit was filed but took responsibility as the head of the defence team.
He requested the court to allow them to withdraw the affidavit and strike it out. The prosecution did not oppose this request. Although the judge was unsure if Mr Atteh knew about the affidavit when it was filed, he instructed that Mr Ahmed be allowed to address the court.
However, Mr Atteh informed the court that Mr Ahmed was not present due to health issues. He added that the absence was not meant to disobey the court's orders. The judge then granted the request and struck out the affidavit.
Drop your comment
No comments yet — be the first to drop the gist 👇