The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has opposed former Minister of Petroleum Resources Diezani Alison-Madueke’s attempt to rely on her acquittal by a United Kingdom court in her ongoing legal challenge to the forfeiture and proposed sale of assets linked to her.
Recall that Diezani was acquitted of corruption charges in a London court.
The commission urged the Federal High Court in Abuja to reject the former minister’s supplementary affidavit seeking to introduce evidence of the UK proceedings into the Nigerian case.
The EFCC stated its position in a five-page further counter-affidavit filed before Justice Inyang Ekwo, arguing that the proceedings before the Southwark Crown Court in London had no bearing on the issues before the Nigerian court.
LEADERSHIP reported that Diezani was discharged and acquitted by the Southwark Crown Court on 17 June 2026, over bribery allegations brought against her in the UK.
She subsequently sought to present the development as a subsequent material fact in her Nigerian suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/ (21/2023), in which she is challenging the EFCC’s moves concerning the forfeiture and proposed sale of properties and personal effects allegedly linked to her.
The former minister’s legal team had previously obtained permission to file additional evidence in the UK proceedings.
However, in its latest response, the EFCC argued that the UK case was separate from the Nigerian proceedings and therefore could not be used to alter the issues already before the Federal High Court.
Oyakhilome Ekienabor, a litigation officer in the law firm of EFCC counsel, Mofesomo Oyetibo, SAN, described portions of Diezani’s supplementary affidavit as misleading, immaterial and irrelevant.
He argued that the proceedings before the Southwark Crown Court were not being prosecuted before any Nigerian court and had no connection to the substantive issues in the suit.
The commission also disputed the claim that the properties listed in its public sale notice were covered by the forfeiture order that Diezani is challenging.
According to the EFCC, the relevant forfeiture order was limited to jewellery and did not extend to other categories of assets or properties.
The commission further contended that a party could not expand the scope of a case through subsequent filings, urging Justice Ekwo to discountenance the supplementary affidavit seeking to place the UK acquittal before the court.
But Diezani’s legal team, led by Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, maintained that the June 17 acquittal was a material development that occurred after the filing of her earlier processes and should therefore be admitted.
Ozekhome argued that the Nigerian case challenged the EFCC’s public notice for the auction or sale of properties and personal effects, which, according to him, affected Diezani’s proprietary rights.
He contended that the commission was seeking to impose serious proprietary consequences on the former minister without a conviction, fair hearing or strict compliance with applicable forfeiture procedures.
The lawyer said the UK acquittal was relevant to issues including the absence of a conviction, a fair hearing, due process, and the safeguards required before the irreversible deprivation of property.
He stressed that Diezani was not asking the Nigerian court to sit on appeal over the UK judgment or automatically treat the foreign decision as conclusive.
Rather, he said, the purpose was to place a new and material fact before the court for consideration in determining the Nigerian case.
At Tuesday’s proceedings, Diezani’s counsel, Queen-Ubokutom Uwe, informed Justice Ekwo that the case had been scheduled for the hearing of the EFCC’s preliminary objection and the originating motion.
She, however, told the court that the commission had served her team with a further counter-affidavit shortly before the hearing.
EFCC counsel, Paul Mgbeoma, expressed readiness to proceed despite what he described as the volume of processes being filed by Diezani’s legal team.
Justice Ekwo subsequently adjourned the matter until 11 November to hear the pending motions.
The hearing will determine, among other issues, whether Diezani can rely on her UK acquittal in seeking to challenge the EFCC’s actions concerning the assets at the centre of the Nigerian proceedings.