Court Slams EFCC for Contempt, Orders Immediate Vacating of Disputed Asokoro Property

Justice Musa Liman of the Federal High Court in Abuja has strongly criticized the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for defying a court order directing its armed personnel to vacate a disputed property.

The judge condemned the anti-corruption agency for allegedly misleading the court into granting an ex-parte order in its favour on Thursday, March 27, 2025, by concealing crucial facts.

Based on the EFCC’s application, the court had initially ordered a prominent member of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and former Abia State governorship candidate, High Chief Ikechi Emenike, to vacate House 6, Also Drive in the upscale Asokoro area of Abuja.

The EFCC claimed the property had been permanently forfeited to the federal government as part of assets traced to former Petroleum Minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, who is facing corruption allegations.

The Commission cited a judgment it said it obtained on October 22, 2022, from Justice M.O. Olajuwon, which it relied on in a motion filed on November 17, 2024, to take over the property.

However, following his eviction, Emenike returned to court with fresh documentation showing that the EFCC had failed to inform the court of an existing tenancy arrangement.

He revealed he had been paying rent to the EFCC and living on the property for over a decade.

He also referred the court to a subsisting judgment from the FCT High Court that granted him the Right of First Refusal to purchase the property. That judgment also held that the EFCC had no legal authority to keep forfeited assets for its use and was instead expected to sell them and remit the proceeds to the federal government’s Treasury Single Account.

Emenike stated that he had previously engaged in discussions with the EFCC under former Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa, during which the agency reportedly agreed to reconsider and possibly sell the property to him.

But the Commission later changed its stance and opted to retain the property, eventually securing an ex-parte eviction order from another court without disclosing the previous ruling or the tenancy.

After reviewing the facts, Justice Liman nullified the ex-parte order and instructed the EFCC to vacate the premises immediately.

He also ordered that a copy of the court’s directive be visibly posted at the property, including on its gate and walls, for the attention of the EFCC Chairman, Ola Olukayode.

However, when court bailiffs attempted to carry out the order, they were reportedly prevented by armed EFCC operatives.

Outraged by the agency’s actions, Justice Liman, in a Friday ruling, accused the EFCC of undermining the authority of the court.

“The law is no respecter of any person. If order of the court can be treated with disdain by an agency of the government, then there will be nothing left but for persons to take law into their own hands. Disobedience to a court order is injurious to the Rule of Law and can lead to anarchy.”

“Where a party has refused to obey court order, the court cannot exercise discretion in favour of such a party. Therefore, this court will deny the Applicant (EFCC) further audience till it purge itself of the contempt.”

Justice Liman emphasized that the May 16 order granting Emenike access to the property remained valid and enforceable. As a result, he declined to entertain a motion filed by the EFCC seeking to halt the enforcement of the court’s judgment in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1123/2021, which favoured Emenike.

Meanwhile, Emenike’s legal team, led by Obi Nwakor, has filed a motion urging the court to issue bench warrants for the arrest of EFCC Chairman, Ola Olukayode, and the Commission’s counsel in the matter, Francis Usani.

The application accuses both men of “brazen and grievous acts of contempt” by obstructing court officials from executing the order issued on May 16, 2025.

The motion also seeks an order directing the Inspector General of Police to immediately arrest both individuals and present them before the court to explain why they should not be jailed for contempt.