The application for judgment seeking a final forfeiture of 8.4 million dollars and N7.4 billion allegedly linked to the immediate past First Lady, Patience Jonathan will be delivered by the Federal High Court on February 11.
The application against the first lady and six others was filed by the EFCC, Naija Politico reports.
Other six respondents respectively are Globus Integrated Services Ltd., Finchley Top Homes Ltd., Am-Pm Global Network Ltd., Pagmat Oil and Gas Ltd. , Magel Resort Ltd., and Esther Oba.
The commission ,via an ex-parte application, obtained an order for interim forfeiture of the sums,on April 20, 2018
Recall that on Oct. 29, 2018, the EFCC counsel, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, filed an application for final forfeiture of the sums.
Oyedepo told the court at a resumed hearing on Wednesday that the EFCC had showed cause by filing and serving a further affidavit to the respondents’ application.
However, counsel to the respondents, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN),opposed from paragraphs eight to paragraph 12 of the affidavit, and prayed the court to expunge them.
Prosecution raised new issues in an attempt to discredit a video exhibit on the case, instead of responding to existing issues. Chief Ozhekome argued.
Noting that no new issues were raised, .Justice Mojisola Olatoregun held that there was no need to expunge the said paragraphs,
In his submission for final forfeiture, Oyedepo told the court in his submission for final judgement that Jonathan, fraudulently used the Women for Change Initiative, a Non Governmental to divert funds
Most of the funds were fraudulently diverted from the NGO to other accounts of the second to sixth respondents – companies said to be owned by the former first lady. Oyedepo added.
We are not asking for forfeiture of the money of the NGO, that is why“Women for Change Initiative is not joined in this suit; the funds we are requesting for are those funds which have been converted that is an unlawful act.’’
Jonathan signed some of the fund transfer instructions personally, and also signed using other people’s names and passport photographs, Oyedepo argued.
He concluded by reiterated thus “the funds we are seeking to forfeit from the second to sixth respondents are not funds from their legitimate businesses but those traced from the NGO,”