Connect with us

Featured

Court of Appeal Voids EFCC’s Seizure of Mike Ozekhome’s Professional Fees

Published

on

The Court of Appeal, Lagos Judicial Division, in a well considered judgement on Friday (May 14, 2021), dismissed an appeal filed by the EFCC against the judgement of Justice Abdulazuz Anka of the Federal High Court, Lagos, delivered on 3,2017, and held in favour of the Respondent, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN.

Justice Anka had defozen Ozekhome’s blocked account in Guaranty Trust Bank and vacated the interim ex parte order he earlier placed on the funds of Mike Ozekhome’s Chambers, at the instance of the EFCC.

The EFCC had obtained the interim ex parte order of forfeiture to freeze the money for 120 days, arguing that the 75m transfered to the account was proceed of unlawful activity, because it was paid to Ozekhome by the then sitting Governor of Ekiti State, Mr Ayodele Fayose,whom it said it was investigating.

The Court of Appeal in dismissing the appeal brought by the EFCC ( FRN), held that the EFCC had wrongfully obtained the ex parte order to freeze the account as the lower court lacked the jurisdiction to grant same and as the defendant could not have committed any infraction to warrant his account being blocked and frozen.

The court after hearing arguments from U. U. Buhari for the Appellant (FRN) and Ejieke Onuoha (for Ozekhome), held that there was uncontradicted evidence shown in invoices and receipts issued by Ozekhome to Fayose that the said sum represented part payment of his professional fees in the handling of various cases for Fayose across Nigeria.

It would be recalled that sometime in 2016, the EFCC had, through Justice I.B.M Idris, then of the Federal High Court, Lagos, frozen Governor Fayose ‘s accounts, accusing him of allegedly keeping proceed of unlawful activity. Fayose immediately engaged Ozekhome’s legal services and he approached the Federal High Court, Ado Ekiti, presided over by Justice Taiwo Taiwo, and challenged the ex parte freezing order granted by Justice Idris.

In a judgement delivered by Hon Justice Taiwo Taiwo, the Judge had found that the freezing order had been improperly granted and without jurisdiction in the first place, and upon suppression of material facts.

Fayose after the judgement went to his bank and withdrew 5 million naira from his defrozen account for himself, while transferring 75m to Ozekhome, as part payment of his professional fees.

The EFCC, though appealed this judgement, still went ahead and freezed Ozekhome’s account, contending that the 75m paid to his chambers by Fayose as professional fees for legal services rendered was proceed of unlawful activity.

Ozekhome filed a motion before the Federal High Court, Lagos, urging it to set aside its earlier order freezing his chambers’ account. He alleged misrepresentation, non disclosure, suppression of material facts and non compliance with the rules of the lower court and Judicial authorities regulating the grant of ex parte applications by the Appellant. Justice Anka after hearing arguments from Ozekhome and Mr Rotimi Oyedepo for the EFCC vacated the ex parte order and defreezed his account with GTBank. It was this judgement that the EFCC appealed to the Court of Appeal.

In an unanimous judgement delivered by the presiding Judge, Hon Justice Chidi Nwaoma Uwa, with Justices Tunde O. Awotoye and James Gambo Abundaga, JJCA, (the other two members of the Panel), concurring, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and found as of fact that the bank account from which Fayose paid the fees was unencumbered as at the time he did having been defozen by Justice Taiwo of the Federal High Court, Ado Ekiti.

The court found and held that the said order of Justice Taiwo which had vacated the order of Justice Idris (a court of equal and coordinate jurisdiction (as permitted by the Supreme Court under certain conditions), remained the extant law as it was still valid, subsisting and binding, having not been set aside by an appellate court or by the trial court itself.

The Court of Appeal also agreed with the lower court and held that from available evidence on record, the disputed amount having already been dissipated by the Respondent as at the time it was frozen by the lower court at the instance of the EFCC, the lower court did not have the requisite jurisdiction to have granted such freezing order in the first case. The court also held that the said sum of 75m was lawful proceed for legal services duly rendered to Fayose by Ozekhome, and not proceed of unlawful activity.

The Court of Appeal also agreed with the lower court, relying on the case of REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION V AG, FEDERATION & CBN (Suit No. FHC/CS/173/2015), decided in 2015, by the Hon Justice Gabriel Kolawaole (then of the Federal High Court, Abuja), and later upheld by the same Court of Appeal in appeal No. CA/A/202/2015 (CBN V REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE NBA), that Legal Practitioners are excluded and exempted from the definition of “DESIGNATED NON-FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS”, as contained in section 25 of the MONEY LAUNDERING (PROHIBITION) ACT, 2011. The section had been declared invalid, null and void, being inconsisted with the overriding section 192 of the Evidence Act. The Court of Appeal held this remains the extant law.

The court also agreed with the finding of the lower court and held that the failure of the EFCC to give security or undertaking to pay damages as one of the conditions precedent to the grant of an interim injunction, as held by the Supreme Court in KOTOYE V CBN was fatal to its case. The court dismissed the Federal Government’s contention that it was not afforded fair hearing before the lower court vacated its freezing order.

The Court of Appeal was denied fair held that it was rather the hearing b efore the order affecting him was made ex parte. Consequently, the Respondent was perfectly entitled to have the order reviewed by the trial court before the expiration of its life span of 120 days, by putting forward his uncontradicte d facts and exhibits, as he did.

The court further held that an ex parte order is expected to be short as an interim measure, and that the lower court was right to have discharged the order it earl i er made before its lifespan of 120 days been misled in granting same, , having found that it had based on suppression of material facts by the EFCC.

On whether a legal practitioner is legally obliged to begin to ask a client for the very source of his money from whi ch the client desired to pay the court said there was no such requirement known to law. It held that : lawyer, “a Legal Practitioner is entitled to his fees for professional services and such fees cannot be rightly labelled as proceeds of crime.

It also held,

“further, it is not a requirement of the law that a legal Practitioner would go into inquiry before receiving his fees from his client, to find out the source of the fund from which he would be paid.”

See court documents below:

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

Attempted Coup: DSS Arraigns Five for Alleged Refusal to Reveal Timipre Sylva’s Hiding Place

Published

on

By

The Department of State Services (DSS) at the Federal High Court in Abuja, arraigned five associates of former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

They are accused of concealing information regarding the whereabouts of their principal, who is alleged to be a financier of an aborted coup attempt against President Bola Tinubu.

Sylva, a former Governor of Bayelsa State, has been declared wanted by the Federal government, and his identified properties have been marked for forfeiture following his indictment as the sponsor and mastermind of the alleged coup plot.

The five associates are Reuben Ayuba, Musa Mohammed, Friday Paul, Paganengigha Anagaha, and Ayebaifife Suobite. They were arraigned on Wednesday before Justice Peter Lifu.

A two-count charge filed against them indicates that the accused became accessories after the fact of felony on April 28, 2026, by concealing the whereabouts of Timipre Sylva, who is classified as a fugitive. The alleged offense is contrary to Section 519 of the Criminal Code Act Law of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Additionally, the DSS has accused them of conspiracy to commit a felony, specifically for concealing the whereabouts of Timipre Sylva, also a fugitive, in violation of Section 516 of the Criminal Code, LFN 2004.

All the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges when they were read to them.

DSS lawyer, Emmanuel Orubor, requested that the judge schedule a date for the DSS to commence their trial by calling witnesses to testify against the defendants.

In response, Sunusi Musa (SAN), who represented Reuben Ayuba and Paganengigha Anagaha (the 1st and 4th accused persons), filed a bail application for his clients on various grounds.

Similar applications were made by Ibrahim Imadegbelo, representing Musa Mohammed (the 2nd accused), I. G. Kelubia, standing for Friday Paul (the 3rd defendant), and E. C. Sogo, who argued for Ayebaifife Suobite (the 5th accused person).

The lawyers pointed out to Justice Lifu that their clients have been in custody since October 25, 2025, and urged the court to grant them bail on liberal terms.

In a brief ruling, Justice Lifu granted them bail in the sum of N5 million each, along with two sureties for each, in a similar amount. The sureties are required to swear to an affidavit of means, provide evidence of three years of tax payment, demonstrate visible means of livelihood, and submit recent passport photographs.

Justice Lifu ordered that the claims of identities of the sureties must be verified by the Registrar of the Court.

Pending the perfection of the bail conditions, the Judge ordered that the accused persons be remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre in Abuja and fixed July 22 for the commencement of trial.

Continue Reading

Featured

UBA Reinforces Commitment to Rewarding Customer-Loyalty with N400m Bonus

Published

on

By

UBA Rewards Customer Loyalty with Over ₦400 Million Bumper Account Anniversary Bonus
…Reinforces commitment to rewarding customers for consistent savings
Africa’s Global Bank, United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc, has rewarded thousands of customers with over ₦400 million in anniversary bonuses under its flagship UBA Bumper Account, reaffirming the Bank’s unwavering commitment to rewarding customer loyalty and promoting a strong savings culture.

The payout, one of the largest loyalty rewards under the Bumper Account initiative since its launch, saw qualifying customers receive anniversary bonuses directly into their accounts, demonstrating UBA’s resolve to create lasting value for customers who consistently save with the Bank.

The UBA Bumper Account is a unique savings product that rewards customers simply for maintaining and growing their savings. Every year an eligible account reaches its anniversary, customers receive a cash bonus, making disciplined saving both rewarding and beneficial over time.
Speaking on the milestone, UBA’s Head, Retail Products, Tomiwa Sotiloye, said the Bank remains committed to ensuring that customers benefit directly from their relationship with UBA.

“At UBA, we believe customer loyalty deserves meaningful recognition. Every bonus paid is our way of saying ‘thank you’ to customers who continue to trust us with their financial aspirations. Surpassing the ₦400 million milestone reflects our commitment to creating products that not only help customers save but also reward them in tangible ways. It is another demonstration that when our customers grow, we grow with them.”

He added that both new and existing customers can open a UBA Bumper Account seamlessly through https://on.ubagroup.com/bumper-tc, any any UBA branch, the UBA Mobile Banking App, by dialing *919#, or online, positioning themselves to qualify for future anniversary rewards.

Also speaking, UBA’s Group Head, Brands, Marketing and Corporate Communications, Alero Ladipo, said the Bank’s customer-centric philosophy continues to shape its product offerings.

“The UBA Bumper Account reflects our unwavering commitment to putting customers first. We deliberately design products that reward responsible financial behaviour while delivering real value. Crediting over ₦400 million directly into customers’ accounts is not just a payout; it is evidence of our promise to make banking more rewarding and to continually appreciate the confidence our customers repose in us.”

The UBA Bumper Account remains one of the Bank’s flagship retail savings products, combining competitive savings benefits, digital convenience and attractive loyalty rewards. It forms part of UBA’s broader strategy to deepen financial inclusion by encouraging sustainable savings habits while delivering exceptional customer experiences.

Continue Reading

Featured

Dele Momodu Leadership Centre Hosts Media Scholar, Prof Abiodun Adeniyi

Published

on

By

By Anjorin Fehintola Stella

We often measure leadership by the institutions people build or the positions they occupy. Yet, during his visit to the Dele Momodu Leadership Centre, Professor Abiodun Adeniyi repeatedly returned to something less visible but perhaps more enduring; the responsibility of documenting one’s life and thoughts. He spoke as someone who understands, at a personal level, what is lost when experience is left unrecorded. His emphasis on documentation was not stylistic advice for writers. It was an argument about memory itself, about how societies retain or lose the wisdom of the people who pass through them.

Ideas disappear when they are undocumented because memory, at the collective level, is fragile and selective. A society does not remember everything that happens within it, it remembers what is written down, repeated, taught, or institutionalised. An undocumented thought, however brilliant, dies with the person who held it, or worse, drifts into vague anecdote, stripped of its original precision. This is why oral cultures, for all their richness, often struggle to transmit complex ideas across generations with fidelity. Professor Adeniyi’s point, then, was not simply about personal record-keeping. History remembers people largely through what they leave behind, not through what they intended to leave behind. Intention without artefact disappears.

When he spoke about travelling, it would be easy to reduce his words to a fondness for movement or exposure. But the deeper claim runs further than that. Travel disrupts familiarity. It exposes individuals to different ways of living, thinking, governing and imagining society. Professor Adeniyi suggested that travelling remains one of the simplest yet most profound forms of education because it broadens not only knowledge but perspective. A person confined to one environment mistakes the local for the universal. Movement across geographies forces a confrontation with alternative logics, alternative arrangements of power, family, and meaning, and that confrontation is often where genuine learning begins.

Perhaps the strongest advice he gave concerned the pursuit of a doctorate. When Aare Dele Momodu spoke of his desire to pursue a PhD, Professor Adeniyi’s response challenged a growing culture in which academic qualifications are sometimes pursued as symbols of prestige rather than vehicles of inquiry. A PhD earned for the title that follows a name produces a credential without a contribution. A PhD earned out of genuine curiosity produces new knowledge and, more importantly, sustains the kind of intellectual restlessness that defines a thinking life. Professor Adeniyi’s counsel was that one should choose a field that strikes them professionally and personally, something that connects to lived purpose rather than social signalling, because the value of advanced study lies in the questions it forces a person to keep asking long after the degree is conferred.

Professor Abiodun did not reserve his counsel for matters of scholarship alone. Turning to the younger staff in the room, Professor Adeniyi offered something closer to reassurance than instruction, that everything they are currently going through, the uncertainty, the striving, the sense of being far from where they hope to be, is a phase both he and Aare Dele Momodu have lived through themselves. It was a reminder that ambition rarely moves on a straight or visible timeline. The goals and dreams that feel distant now are not denied, only delayed, and what stands between the present moment and their fulfilment is simply time and dedication, applied without pause.

 

Underneath all these threads, travel, documentation, the meaning of scholarship, was a single, unifying idea about legacy. Legacy isn’t what people say about you. It’s what remains after you leave. This distinction matters because praise is temporary and circumstantial, shaped by mood, politics, and memory’s natural decay. What remains, however, is structural. It is the book on a shelf, the institution still running, the idea still being taught.

This is where the conversation returned, inevitably, to the Centre itself. The library. The scholars’ rooms. The conversations. The institution. Professor Adeniyi appeared genuinely moved by what he encountered, not by the scale of the buildings, but by what the buildings were designed to hold. Perhaps that is why Professor Adeniyi appeared genuinely moved by the Centre. It was never merely about architecture. It was about permanence. Buildings become legacy only when they preserve ideas.

Every visit leaves footprints. Some are physical. Others are intellectual. Professor Abiodun Adeniyi’s visit left the latter.

Continue Reading

Trending