The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has opposed an application by former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, seeking to present evidence of her acquittal by the Southwark Crown Court in London before a Federal High Court in Abuja.
In a further counter-affidavit filed in response to Diezani’s application, the EFCC urged Justice Inyang Ekwo to dismiss the request, arguing that the former minister’s acquittal by a foreign court was irrelevant to the issues before the Nigerian court.
Justice Ekwo had, on July 1, granted Diezani’s application to present evidence of the London court’s decision after her lawyer, Godwin Iyinbor, moved the motion unopposed by EFCC counsel, Mr Mofesomo Oyetibo, SAN.
The Southwark Crown Court had, on June 17, discharged and acquitted Diezani over criminal allegations of bribery brought against her in the United Kingdom.
Following the development, Diezani, through a suit before Justice Ekwo, sought to reclaim assets forfeited to the EFCC.
In her amended originating motion marked FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023, she sued the EFCC as the sole respondent.
At the previous hearing, Iyinbor sought the court’s permission to file a further or supplementary affidavit to introduce what he described as a fresh and material development concerning Diezani’s acquittal in the UK.
The EFCC did not object to the application at the time, prompting the judge to grant the request.
However, after Diezani’s legal team filed the further affidavit, the anti-graft agency filed a counter-affidavit challenging the move.
When the case came up on Tuesday, Mrs Queen-Ubokutom Uwe, who appeared for Diezani, told the court that the matter was scheduled for hearing of the EFCC’s preliminary objection and their originating motion.
She, however, informed the court that the commission had served them with a fresh motion shortly before proceedings commenced.
Uwe said the motion contained the EFCC’s further counter-affidavit in response to their supplementary affidavit and also reminded the court of their application seeking to regularise their processes.
Responding, Paul Mgbeoma, counsel for the EFCC, expressed concern over what he described as the continued filing of processes by Diezani’s legal team.
Mgbeoma said he was ready to proceed with the hearing. Justice Ekwo subsequently adjourned the matter until Nov. 11 for hearing of the pending motions.
In its further counter-affidavit dated and filed on Oct. 5, the EFCC, through Oyakhilome Ekienabor, a litigation officer at Oyetibo’s law firm, argued that some of the depositions in Diezani’s application were misleading, immaterial, and irrelevant to the substantive issues before the court.
“The proceedings before the Southwark Crown Court, London, United Kingdom, and the purported acquittal of the applicant therein, are in respect of a proceeding that is not being prosecuted before any Nigerian court and have nothing to do with the substantive suit before this Honorable Court,” the commission argued.
Ekienabor also submitted that the public sale notice contained nothing indicating that any of the listed properties belonged to Diezani.
He added that the forfeiture order applied exclusively to jewelry and did not extend to other categories of assets or property.
The EFCC argued that parties could not expand the scope of a case by introducing matters unrelated to the issues before the court.
“The applicant’s further/supplementary affidavit introduces irrelevant facts into this suit, thereby diverting attention from the core issues before this honorable court,” Ekienabor said.
The commission consequently urged the court to disregard Diezani’s further or supplementary affidavit seeking to introduce evidence of her UK acquittal.
However, in the 10-ground argument filed by her counsel, Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, Diezani maintained that the subsequent acquittal was materially relevant to her case.
Ozekhome said Diezani had instituted the suit to challenge, among other things, the public notice issued by the EFCC for the auction and sale of properties and personal effects allegedly affecting her proprietary rights.
He argued that a key issue in the case was whether the EFCC could impose what he described as serious proprietary consequences on Diezani without a conviction, a fair hearing, and strict compliance with statutory provisions governing the forfeiture, management, and disposal of assets.
According to him, Diezani filed her amended originating motion on Feb. 19, 2025, following the court’s leave granted on Feb. 17, 2025.
Ozekhome said the acquittal by the Southwark Crown Court on June 17, 2026, occurred while the Nigerian suit was pending and constituted a subsequent development relevant to the issues before the court.
He argued that the development was particularly relevant to questions concerning conviction, fair hearing, due process and the propriety of irreversible deprivation of property.
The senior lawyer stressed that Diezani was not asking the Nigerian court to sit on appeal against the UK judgment or to automatically treat the foreign decision as conclusive in the Nigerian proceedings.
Rather, he said, the application sought to place a subsequent material fact before the court to assist it in reaching a just determination of the case.
READ ALSO: Ekiti Court Jails Woman 14 Years for Child Stealing, Declares Her Fugitive
Ozekhome maintained that the development was not available when Diezani filed her earlier processes and therefore could not have been included at the time.
He argued that the court had the discretion to allow the filing of additional evidence where it would assist in determining the issues fairly and that the EFCC would suffer no prejudice if the application was granted. He consequently urged the court to allow the application in the interest of justice.
 has opposed an application by former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, seeking to present evidence of her acquittal by the Southwark Crown Court in London before a Federal High Court in Abuja.){kind=link}