EFCC opposes Diezani’s move to present evidence of UK court acquittal in Abuja case

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has opposed former Minister of Petroleum Resources Diezani Alison-Madueke’s application to present evidence of her acquittal of bribery charges by the Southwark Crown Court, London in the United Kingdom.

The anti-graft agency urged Judge Inyang Ekwo to dismiss the application.

The commission, which filed a counter-affidavit against the application, maintained that the purported acquittal of Mrs Alison-Madueke by a foreign criminal court was not material or relevant to the specific issues for determination before the instant court.

In an earlier filing, the EFCC stated that the assets Mrs Alison-Madueke was seeking to retrieve through the legal action, which has been ongoing since 2023, had been auctioned off based on court orders.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the judge, on 1 July, granted the application filed by the ex-minister to present evidence of the London court.

Mofesomo Oyetibo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) who appeared for the EFCC at the time, did not oppose the application.

EFCC’s concession to the application, moved by the former minister’s lawyer Godwin Iyinbor, prompted the judge to grant the application.

The UK acquittal

The UK court’s judgement delivered on 17 June cleared Mrs Alison-Madueke of all bribery charges brought against her by British prosecutors.

Mrs Alison-Madueke, who served as Nigeria’s petroleum minister between 2010 and 2015 under former President Goodluck Jonathan, was acquitted of five counts of accepting bribes and one count of conspiracy to commit bribery.

British prosecutors alleged in the case that Mrs Alison-Madueke received lavish benefits and enjoyed what they described as “a life of luxury” in London, funded by oil and gas industry figures seeking favourable treatment and lucrative contracts in Nigeria’s petroleum sector.

They argued that the benefits were provided in exchange for the oil and gas contracts she awarded during her tenure as petroleum minister between 2010 and 2015.

However, the former minister had maintained throughout the trial that she neither accepted bribes nor exercised direct control over the award of government contracts.

The UK discharged and acquitted the embattled former minister of the bribery charges after a jury at the London court returned not-guilty verdicts.

Mrs Alison-Madueke faces pending corruption charges and a flurry of forfeiture orders on slews of assets traced to her back in Nigeria as she came under investigations and prosecutions in the UK.

Battle to recover forfeited assets

The former minister who left Nigeria in 2015 shortly after she left office commenced her suit, suing EFCC as the sole defendant in 2023, to stop the auctioning of her forfeited assets.

She filed an amended version of the suit in February 2025.

In the aftermath of her acquittal by the EFCC in June, filed an application to showcase the UK judgement as evidence of her innocence and legitimate acquisition of the assets.

EFCC has stated in a filing that the assets had been auctioned off based on court orders.

During the previous court sitting, Mrs Alison-Madueke’s lawyer, Mr Iyinbor, moved a motion seeking the permission to file a further/supplementary affidavit for the purpose of bringing fresh and material development with respect to her acquittal by the UK court.

EFCC’s lawyer, Ms Oyetibo, did not raise any objection to the filing the application, leaving the judge with no choice than to grant the request.

The former minister’s lawyer then proceeded to file the further/supplementary affidavit, against which the EFCC filed a counter-affidavit.

In the agency’s counter-affidavit sworn by Oyakhilome Ekienabor, a litigation officer in Ms Oyetibo’s law firm, the EFCC opposed Mrs Alison-Madueke’s request to present the evidence.

EFCC’s opposition

At Tuesday’s proceedings, Queen-Ubokutom Uwe, who appeared for Mrs Alison-Madueke, informed the court the EFCC had just served with EFCC’s further counter-affidavit in response to her client’s further/supplementary affidavit.

She equally reminded the court of their motion to regularise their processes.

Responding, Paul Mgbeoma, who appeared for the EFCC on Tuesday, expressed surprise at the frequency of Mrs Alison-Madueke’s new filings as if it was an election petition case.

Mr Mgbeoma then told the court that he was ready to proceed with the hearing.

The judge consequently fixed 11 November for hearing of the motions.

NAN reports that EFCC’s further counter-affidavit filed on 5 October, described several claims in Mrs Alison-Maduelke’s further affidavit as misleading, immaterial and irrelevant to the substantive issues for determination in her present suit.

“The proceedings before the Southwark Crown Court, London, United Kingdom, and the purported acquittal of the applicant therein, are in respect of a proceeding that is not being prosecuted before any Nigerian court and have nothing to do with the substantive suit before this honourable court,” wrote Oyakhilome Ekienabor who swore the anti-graft agency’s counter-affidavit.

The agency maintained in the filing that there is nothing in the public sale notice indicating that any of the properties listed therein belong to the applicant.

It added that “the order for forfeiture relates exclusively to items of jewelry and does not extend to any other category of assets or properties.”

It accused the applicant of trying to expand the scope of her case through the fresh filings.

“The applicant’s further/supplementary affidavit introduces irrelevant facts into this suit, thereby diverting attention from the core issues before this honourable court,” the counter-affidavit read.

He, therefore, urged the court to reject the further/supplementary affidavit seeking to present evidence of her acquittal in the UK court.

The suit

NAN recalls Mrs Alison-Madueke filed the suit through her lead counsel, Mike Ozekhome.

She argued, as part of the 10 grounds cited in support of the suit, that she commenced the suit challenging, among other things, the public notice issued by the EFCC for the public auction/sale of properties and/or personal effects affecting her proprietary rights.

“A major plank of the applicant’s case before this honourable court is that the respondent had sought to visit the applicant with grave proprietary consequences without conviction, without fair hearing, and without strict compliance with the relevant statutory provisions regulating forfeiture, management and disposal of properties,” her lawyer argued.

The filing added that the amended suit was filed on 19 February 2025 based on the leave of the court granted on 17 February 2025.

“After the filing of the applicant’s processes and while this suit was still pending before this honourable court, a subsequent and material event occurred, to wit: the applicant was acquitted by the Southwark Crown Court, London, United Kingdom, on 17 June 2026, of criminal allegations of bribery brought against her, a proceeding of obvious material relevance to the allegations repeatedly referenced in relation to the applicant.

“The said subsequent development is material and relevant to the applicant’s case, particularly as it relates to the issues of absence of conviction, fair hearing, due process, propriety of irreversible proprietary deprivation, and the need for strict compliance with statutory safeguards before disposal of properties affecting the applicant’s proprietary rights,” the court document read.

READ ALSO: EFCC hands over N107m recovered from property fraud to Lagos victim

It added that the ex-minister did not seek by this application to invite the court to sit in appeal over the said foreign decision or to treat the decision as automatically conclusive of the Nigerian proceedings.

However, the document stated the application is to enable Mrs Alison-Madueke to place before the court subsequent material fact which would assist the court in doing substantial justice.

According to Mr Ozekhome who filed the application on behalf of the former minister, the said fact was not available at the time the applicant filed her earlier processes and could not have been pleaded or deposed to earlier.

He submitted that the court had the power and discretion to allow a party to file the application where such facts would assist the court in the just determination of the issues before it.

He said EFCC would not be prejudiced by the grant of the application.

He said it would be in the interest of justice to grant the application.