The Lagos Court of Appeal has reinstated an interim forfeiture order originally secured by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to seize 14 properties allegedly associated with Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello.
Delivering the ruling virtually, Justice Yargata Nimpar overturned an earlier Federal High Court judgment that had nullified the order. She emphasized that the lower court erred in relying on Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, which protects sitting governors from civil and criminal proceedings. According to Justice Nimpar, this immunity does not cover assets suspected to be derived from illicit activity, which may be investigated and temporarily preserved.
Justices Danlami Senchi and Paul Bassi concurred, directing the EFCC to proceed to a final forfeiture hearing.
Background and Legal Arguments
- In February 2023, Justice Nicholas Oweibo granted the interim forfeiture order at the Federal High Court in Lagos.
- The properties in question, located in Lagos, Abuja, and Dubai, were suspected to be acquired with unlawful funds.
- The EFCC was instructed to publicize the order in two national newspapers, inviting parties to contest the final forfeiture.
Governor Bello responded by filing a motion to vacate the order, asserting:
- The assets were obtained before he assumed office and not with state funds.
- The EFCC lacked jurisdiction due to his constitutional immunity.
- The Proceeds of Crime Act, 2022 could not apply retroactively.
His team also cited a Kogi State High Court injunction and argued jurisdictional flaws, noting that the affected properties were outside Lagos and that Bello resides in Lokoja.
EFCC’s Position The EFCC countered that:
- No court had prohibited it from conducting its legal duties.
- The targeted properties—including a luxury unit in Dubai’s Burj Khalifa—warranted investigation.
- An additional ₦400 million linked to the case should also be forfeited.
Although Justice Oweibo later vacated the order in April 2023, citing constitutional immunity, the appellate court ruled the lower court had erred in dismissing the matter. It emphasized that suspected proceeds of crime are not shielded by Section 308 and should be subject to legal scrutiny.
The Court of Appeal rejected Bello’s objections and authorized the EFCC to move forward with the final forfeiture proceedings.
