Former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, has formally approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, pleading for an order to restrain the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from proceeding with the sale of her seized assets.
Through her legal counsel, led by senior advocate Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, Diezani has argued that the EFCC’s move to auction her properties—following a public notice issued in 2023—is a direct violation of her constitutional right to a fair hearing.
In her legal submissions, the former minister insists that the EFCC’s actions should be halted immediately and further requests the court to issue an order compelling the anti-graft agency to recover any of her assets that may have already been sold.
According to Diezani, the forfeiture orders upon which the EFCC has based its actions were granted by various courts under misleading circumstances, involving misrepresentations and the suppression of crucial facts.
She maintains that she was never properly notified or served with the necessary legal documents regarding the proceedings that led to the final forfeiture of her properties. This, she claims, denied her the opportunity to present her side of the case before the courts made their rulings.
Furthermore, Diezani strongly disputes the legitimacy of the forfeiture orders, arguing that they were improperly obtained and should therefore be nullified by the court.
She asserts that, despite the accusations levied against her, she has never been convicted of any crime related to the seized assets. In her argument, she describes the sale of her properties as unjust and unwarranted.
She further states: “In many cases, the final forfeiture orders were made against properties which affected the Applicant’s interest. The courts were misled into granting these orders based on suppression or non-disclosure of material facts.”
Diezani contends that the applications used to obtain the final forfeiture orders were riddled with “gross misstatements, misrepresentations, non-disclosure, concealment, and suppression of crucial material facts.” She insists that the court has the power to set aside such orders as a matter of justice, emphasizing that “a void order is as good as if it was never made at all.”
As the legal battle unfolds, the public awaits the Federal High Court’s ruling on her request to stop the EFCC from selling off her confiscated assets.