A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the temporary forfeiture of $49,700 allegedly recovered from a former Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for Sokoto State, Dr. Nura Ali.
LEADERSHIP reports that Ali served up until the 2023 general election.
Justice Emeka Nwite granted the order on Monday after the counsel to the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), Osuobeni Akponimisingha, filed an ex-parte motion.
The motion sought to preserve the funds pending further investigation.
The court also directed the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN), through the ICPC and the Department of State Services (DSS), to deposit the recovered funds in an escrow account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). Additionally, it mandated the publication of a notice in a national newspaper to invite any interested parties to show cause why the money should not be permanently forfeited to the federal government.
According to court documents, the money was discovered during a DSS search of Dr. Ali’s residence in Kano State. “The alleged moveable property of $49,700 was bribe money received by Dr. Nura Ali when he was the Independent National Electoral Commission’s Resident Electoral Commissioner for Sokoto State,” the applicant stated in court filings.
The ICPC argued that the money was not a legitimate earning, emphasising that INEC does not pay its staff in foreign currency. “The alleged moveable property is suspected to be proceeds of crime,” the filing added.
Dr. Ali claimed in his extra-judicial statement that the funds, totalling $150,000, were given to him by former governors of Sokoto State, Aminu Tambuwal, and Senator Aliyu Wamakko. The ICPC further revealed that Dr. Ali had written letters to the DSS requesting the release of the funds, describing them as gifts.
The ICPC lawyer presented four exhibits, including the search warrant, extra-judicial statements made by Dr. Ali, and his letters to the DSS. The ICPC maintained that the application was necessary to prevent the dissipation of the funds.
“This application is not in conflict with Sections 43 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which guarantee the rights of citizens to acquire and own property,” the anti-graft agency argued, adding that the measure was to ensure due process.
Justice Nwite found the application meritorious and granted the temporary forfeiture order. “Where cogent and verifiable explanation exists as to how the property was acquired, devoid of crime, the alleged owner or any other person having proprietary interest in the property will be allowed unrestricted possession of the property,” the judge noted.
The court adjourned the case to January 30, 2025, for a compliance report on the publication in the media, and to March 31 for the substantive hearing.
We’ve got the edge. Get real-time reports, breaking scoops, and exclusive angles delivered straight to your phone. Don’t settle for stale news. Join LEADERSHIP NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates →
Join Our WhatsApp Channel
