The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, has overturned the final forfeiture order issued on the assets of the former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, to the Federal Government.
In a split decision of two-to-one, delivered on April 9, 2025, the appellate court set aside the judgment and ordered a retrial of the case at the lower court.
Recall that the Federal High Court in Lagos had, in its ruling on November 1, 2024, granted the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)’s application for the final forfeiture of Emefiele’s assets.
The forfeited assets included two fully detached duplexes located at No. 17b, Hakeem Odumosu Street, Lekki Phase-1, Lagos; an undeveloped land measuring 1,919.592 square metres with survey plan No. DS/LS.340 at Oyinkan Abayomi Drive (formerly Queens Drive), Ikoyi, Lagos; a bungalow at No. 65A Oyinkan Abayomi Drive, Ikoyi, Lagos and a four-bedroom duplex at No. 12A, Probyn Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.
Others were – an industrial complex under construction on 22 plots of land in Agbor, Delta State; eight units of uncompleted apartments on a plot measuring 2,457.60 square metres at No. 8A Adekunle Lawal Road, Ikoyi, Lagos and a fully detached duplex on a plot measuring 2,217.87 square metres at No. 2A Bank Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.
Additionally, the court ordered the forfeiture of $2,045,000 and shares certificates in Queensdorf Global Fund Limited to the Federal Government.
The EFCC had argued that the properties were reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities. Dissatisfied with the lower court’s decision, Emefiele, represented by his legal team led by Olalekan Ojo (SAN), appealed the decision. The EFCC was named as the sole respondent in the appeal marked: CA/LAG/CV/1051/24.
While the appellate court set aside the forfeiture of some listed real estate and ordered a retrial, it upheld the final forfeiture of $2,045,000 in cash to the Federal Government.
The court noted that Emefiele had not contested the seizure of the cash sum, and therefore, there was no basis for setting it aside.
However, the Justices were not unanimous in their reasoning. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Ɗanlami Senchi disagreed with the majority judgment and maintained that the original forfeiture should stand.
He argued that the EFCC had sufficiently established that the properties were acquired through companies not legally linked to Emefiele, and since those entities did not challenge the seizure, the forfeiture was valid.
Justice Senchi further contended that there were no conflicts in the affidavit evidence that necessitated oral testimony, describing the decision to reopen the case for full trial as a delay tactic that could undermine the judicial process. He affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court and dismissed Emefiele’s appeal as lacking merit.
