Court rules in favour of EFCC, orders final forfeiture of FIRS official’s assets

Stanley Ihedigbo

Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled in favor of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), ordering the final forfeiture of two properties linked to Aminu Sidi Garunbabba, a staff member of the Federal Inland Revenue Services (FIRS).

The properties are located in FCT, Abuja and Kano state.

According to the Head, Media and Publicity, EFCC, Mr. Dele Oyewale, both properties which are linked to Garunbabba, a senior staff of the FIRS are a four-bedroom terrace masonite with boys quarter, situated in Barumark Groove Estate, Plot 667 Cadastral Zone BO3, Wuye District, Abuja and the other at N0 5 Lodge Road, Kano State.

The order was given following a motion ex-parte for their final forfeiture, dated March 16, 2022, and filed by the Commission, through its counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, under Section 44(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Section 17 of Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, No 14, 2006.

The court had on February 16, 2022, granted an interim forfeiture order of the properties and directed the publication of the order in a national newspaper to make for any interested party to show cause as to why the properties should not be finally forfeited to the federal government.

Moving the motion for the final forfeiture order at Thursday’s sitting, the prosecution counsel informed the court that the property was reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.

However, the defence counsel in a preliminary objection, raised concerns that a public officer cannot be investigated and prosecuted when an ongoing administrative disciplinary action is yet to be concluded.

Justice Egwatu after listening to the submissions of the counsel dismissed the objection and granted the request of the prosecution for a final forfeiture.

The judge held that the matter was a non-conviction-based forfeiture which is different from a criminal charge that targets an individual and the simultaneous actions do not amount to abuse of the court process.

“This case targets properties suspected to be proceeds of crime, the two cases are different. A criminal case requires proving beyond reasonable doubt while in this case, only a suspicion suffices. Both actions can go on simultaneously and one cannot abate the other. The parties are different, and the target in both cases is different, one is proved beyond reasonable doubt and the other is reasonable suspicion. The issues are also different, a person cannot be allowed to benefit from illegitimate acts. The respondent failed to show any reasonable cause that the funds used in purchasing the property were from his legitimate earnings, so the request for final forfeiture is granted.

The journey to the final forfeiture started with EFCC’s intelligence that unraveled the corrupt activities of staffers of FIRS who conspired among themselves and defrauded the Service of millions of naira under the guise of Duty Tour Allowances for non-existent trips.