By Taiye Agbaje
Abuja, Jan. 5, 2026
In a significant ruling that underscores Nigeria’s ongoing battle against financial crime within its critical energy sector, the Federal High Court in Abuja has granted the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) an interim order to forfeit N30.7 million to the Federal Government. The funds are suspected to be linked to fraudulent activities connected to the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).
Justice Emeka Nwite, presiding over the case, deemed the EFCC’s ex-parte application meritorious. The ruling initiates a crucial legal process known as non-conviction-based asset forfeiture—a powerful tool increasingly used globally to disrupt the financial infrastructure of crime. This procedure allows authorities to target suspected proceeds of crime even before securing a criminal conviction, based on a balance of probabilities rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Understanding the Legal Mechanism: The Interim Forfeiture Order
Justice Nwite’s order is not final. He directed the EFCC to publish the interim forfeiture notice in a national newspaper, triggering a 14-day window for any interested party—including the alleged owners—to appear before the court to “show cause” why the funds should not be permanently forfeited. The case is adjourned until January 22 for a report on this publication compliance. This procedural step is a cornerstone of justice, ensuring that asset recovery actions respect the constitutional right to a fair hearing and protect innocent third parties.
The EFCC’s application, filed under Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, specifically argued that the N30.7 million constitutes “proceeds of unlawful activities.” The commission’s lawyer, Emenike Mgbemele, moved the motion originally filed by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Ekele Iheanacho.
Unpacking the Investigation: From NNPC to BDCs and FIRS
The affidavit by EFCC investigator Bilkisu Abubakar reveals a complex financial trail. The investigation into “high profile officials of the NNPC” led to a Bureau De Change (BDC) operator, Mr. Adamu Yakubu. Analysis of Yakubu’s transaction ledger revealed a staggering flow of over N4 billion directed to various individuals and companies by one Mr. Ibrahim Sani, a staff member of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS).
This detail is particularly alarming, as it suggests the potential misuse of positions in one government agency (FIRS) to launder funds possibly originating from another (NNPC). According to the affidavit, Sani would deposit large sums in US dollars with Yakubu, who would then disburse the naira equivalent to accounts specified by Sani. Sani allegedly admitted to neither knowing nor verifying the source of these massive dollar deposits—a classic red flag for money laundering.
The N30.7 million in question represents a residual balance from these transactions that Yakubu still held. In a curious twist, both Yakubu and Sani have denied ownership of this specific sum, despite the documented history of their financial relationship. Yakubu has already converted the balance into four manager’s cheques (N10m, N10m, N10m, and N700,000) made payable to the EFCC’s Recovery Account.
Broader Context: The NNPC Transition and Systemic Challenges
This case emerges against the backdrop of the NNPC’s historic transition. As noted, the corporation was formally changed to the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) on July 19, 2022, under the provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) 2021. This reform aimed to create a more transparent, commercially focused, and accountable national oil company. However, this ruling indicates that investigations into alleged fraud from the pre-transition era remain active and that legacy issues of governance and financial control persist, posing challenges to the new entity’s clean slate.
Why This Case Matters: Implications for Anti-Corruption and Governance
1. Targeting the Enablers: The case highlights the role of non-bank financial channels, like BDC operators, in potentially facilitating large-scale money laundering. It signals the EFCC’s focus on following the money through the entire ecosystem of enablers.
2. Inter-Agency Suspicion: The involvement of an FIRS staffer in moving billions linked to an NNPC probe raises serious questions about institutional integrity and collusion across different arms of government revenue services.
3. Proactive Asset Recovery: The use of an interim forfeiture order seeks to swiftly secure suspected illicit gains, preventing their dissipation during what could be a lengthy investigation and potential prosecution.
4. Public Accountability: The requirement for newspaper publication makes the process public, serving as both a deterrent and a reassurance of ongoing judicial oversight in the fight against corruption.
The adjourned date of January 22 will be the next critical point. If no credible claimant successfully argues for the return of the N30.7 million, the court may order its permanent forfeiture to the state, representing a tangible recovery of assets for the Nigerian people. This case, while focused on a specific sum, is a microcosm of the larger, intricate battle against graft in Nigeria’s most lucrative sector.
Edited by Sadiya Hamza
Source link
