The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to disregard evidence of Diezani Alison-Madueke’s acquittal by a United Kingdom court in a suit challenging the forfeiture of her assets.
Gatekeepers News reports that the commission made the request in a further counter-affidavit filed in opposition to the former petroleum minister’s application to introduce evidence of her acquittal by the Southwark Crown Court in London.
Diezani was acquitted on June 17, 2026, of criminal allegations of bribery brought against her in the UK.
In her suit, the former minister is challenging, among other things, an EFCC public notice for the auction and sale of properties and personal effects which she says affect her proprietary rights.
She had asked the Federal High Court to allow her to introduce the UK acquittal as a subsequent development relevant to the case.
However, in the counter-affidavit filed on October 5, Oyakhilome Ekienabor, a litigation officer in the law firm of Mofesomo Oyetibo, counsel to the EFCC, argued that the acquittal was irrelevant to the issues before the Nigerian court.
Ekienabor said the proceedings before the Southwark Crown Court were not being prosecuted before a Nigerian court and had no bearing on the substantive suit.
“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 honourable court,” the affidavit reads.
The EFCC also argued that the forfeiture order at issue relates only to jewellery and does not cover other assets or properties.
“The order for forfeiture relates exclusively to items of jewellery and does not extend to any other category of assets or properties,” Ekienabor said.
The commission further contended that Diezani’s supplementary affidavit introduced irrelevant facts and was an attempt to divert the court’s attention from the issues raised in the suit.
It therefore urged the court to discountenance the supplementary affidavit to the extent that it seeks to introduce evidence of the UK acquittal.
Diezani, however, argued that her acquittal constituted a material development that occurred after she had filed her earlier court processes.
Her counsel, Mike Ozekhome, said the development was relevant to issues including the absence of a conviction, fair hearing, due process and the propriety of depriving his client of property.
Ozekhome maintained that Diezani was not asking the Nigerian court to sit on appeal over the UK decision or regard it as automatically conclusive of the Nigerian proceedings.
Rather, he said, the acquittal should be considered as a subsequent material fact in determining the suit.
At Tuesday’s proceedings, Queen-Ubokutom Uwe, who appeared for Diezani, informed the court that the EFCC had served her legal team with its further counter-affidavit shortly before the hearing.
Paul Mgbeoma, counsel for the EFCC, said he was ready to proceed with the matter.
Justice Inyang Ekwo, who presided over the proceedings, subsequently adjourned the case until November 11 for hearing of the motions.
