The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has faulted the claim by Senator Ike Ekweremadu that it provided information that made the United Kingdom (UK) authorities refuse to grant him and his wife bail.
Ekweremadu’s son, Lloyd had claimed, in a motion seeking to set aside the November 4 order of interim forfeiture made against 40 properties liked to his father, that his parents were being held in the UK owing to the information supplied by the EFCC, including claims that they were being investigated.
Lloyd claimed that the EFCC obtained the interim forfeiture order by fraud and by withholding vital facts from the court, knowing that his parents, who are being held in the UK, would be unable to take necessary steps within the 14 days required by law to challenge the order.
But, in its counter affidavit, the EFCC argued that the allegations made against it by Lloyd showed he was not conversant with the proceedings in the criminal prosecution against his parents in the London court, which was why he thought it (the EFCC) “has a hand in the predicament and travails of his parents.”
The EFCC, while not denying communicating with the UK authorities, said its 18th July, 2022 letter to the Crown Prosecution Service (UK) in response to the Crown Prosecution’s letter of July 17th July, 2022 “was a mere routine to a counterpart government agency in accordance with the global best practice of information sharing with other law enforcement and other agencies in the USA and U.K.
“The response of the respondent to the Crown Prosecution Service was never an instigation or encouragement to the Crown Prosecution Service to detain Senator Ike Ekweremadu or anyone else, as the respondent was neither linked to or had any interest in the subject of investigation in the U.K., namely trafficking a person with a view to exploitation, that is, organ harvesting.
“Both the Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service in the U.K. are independent agencies with wide discretion to carry out their duties/responsibilities and cannot be influenced by anyone, including the respondent.
“The respondent, being a foremost premiere and flagship law enforcement agency do share information and intelligence with other law enforcement agencies worldwide including the Metropolitan Police of the U.K., FBI of the United States, KGB of Russia and other renowned law enforcement agencies.
“As such, the innuendoes, insinuations speculations aan presumptions manifest in the aforementioned paragraphs of Lloyd Ekweremadu’s affidavit are unfounded and unkind to the respondent,” it said.
The EFCC, which claimed to have been investigating Ekweremadu for money laundering before now, argued that no law requires it to initiate forfeiture proceedings or criminal charges against a suspect within a particular number of years or a time frame.
It added that “the filing of the instant forfeiture proceedings was a mere coincidence with the arrest of Senator Ike Ekweremadu and his wife, Beatrice N. Ekweremadu in the U.K.
“The respondent has done substantial Investigation warranting the steps it took in the instant application for the forfeiture of the properties reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of crime.”
While faulting the motion filed by Lloyd, said to be a director in one of the companies linked with his father (Power Properties Nigeria Ltd) the EFCC argued that what he ought to do was to file an affidavit to show cause why a final order of forfeiture should not be made on the property linked to his parents.
Lawyer to the EFCC, Sylvanus Tahir (SAN) argued otherwise and prayed the court to reject the motion since the case was not directed at Ekweremadu, but at the property, to which some individuals and organizations were already laying claim.
Justice Inyang Ekwo has adjourned till January 25 next year for the ruling.