$15.5 million Money Laundering: Court Declines To Unfreeze Patience Jonathan’s Account

Justice Mohammed Idris of the Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday declined to unfreeze the 15.591 million frozen by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), allegedly belonging to four companies linked to the former first lady, Mrs. Patience Jonathan.

Justice Idris refused to give a verdict on the contentious case on the ground that the subject matter of the case cannot be determined by a way of an originating summons because it contained disputed facts that can only be resolved by oral evidence.

The judge therefore ordered parties to file pleading since issues have been joined as to the ownership of the money.

The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from that formulated by the plaintiff in the originating summons, which he said is unacceptable.

He also said, “The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They go to no issue and will be ignored by the court.

“I hold that this court lacks the competence, lacks the competence to determine the issues raised by the defendants in their written addresses having abandoned the specific issues formulated by the plaintiff in the originating summons.

“It is unfortunate. I say this because the issues raised by the defendants appear on the face of it good and deserving to be considered on their merit. But I as I understand it to be the law, sentiment has no basis in the adjudicatory system,” the judge said.

Justice Idris further held that where processes are not properly prepared, any defect would render the proceeding fatal as the court cannot “re-formulate” the issues for determination.

The judge further held that there is a contention as to issues and facts as to the money’s ownership.

“In respect of this issue, the contention appears divided, and there is clearly an air of friction in the proceedings,” the judge said.

According to him, all the counter-affidavits filed by the defendants contain disputed facts that cannot be decided without oral evidence.

“I in the light of the above affidavit evidence, it cannot in my view be rightly contended that there are no disputed facts of substance as to the ownership of the said funds and the law.

“The issues of fact raised by the defendants herein are not spurious or irrelevant. The affidavit of the plaintiff is also not conjectural.

“In my view, the facts are contentious, and oral evidence needs to be led by the parties herein. In the light of the above facts, this case is generally not suitable for an originating summons procedure.

“In the circumstances, the court hereby orders that the parties herein file pleadings in accordance with the Federal High Court civil procedure rules 2009 and trial shall then proceed accordingly. This is the order of the court,” Justice Idris held.

Mrs. Jonathan in the suit is claiming the sum of $200 million against the EFCC, Skye Bank Plc, a former special assistant to her husband, Waripama-Owei Dudafa and four others for what she described as the inconvenience and embarrass she suffered as a result of the freezing of her accounts.

Also joined in the suit are four companies: Pluto Property and Investment company Ltd, Seagate Property Development and Investment Company Ltd, Transocean Property and investment company Ltd and Globus Integrated Service Ltd. former special assistant to her husband, Waripama-Owei Dudafa

It will be recalled that the four companies, which the EFCC claimed was used by Dudafa to launder the $15.591 million dollars, had already pleaded guilty to the offence of money laundering before Justice Babs Kuewumi of the same court.

The sum involved in the criminal case is the same money which Mrs. Jonathan is claiming belongs to her as the sole signatory to the accounts of the convicted companies.

She, however, denied ownership of the companies.