The Court of Appeal in Lagos has upheld the final forfeiture of N293.97 million, multiple landed properties and investment assets linked to retired Major General Emmanuel Jebe Atewe, affirming an earlier judgment of the Federal High Court ordering the assets forfeited to the Federal Government.
In a unanimous judgment delivered on Wednesday, Justice Boloukuromo Moses Ugo, who read the lead decision of the three-member panel, dismissed Atewe’s appeal and affirmed the ruling of Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court, Lagos, which granted the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)’s application for the permanent forfeiture of the assets.
The forfeited assets include N293,970,000, 30,000 MTN-linked investment units in Stanbic IBTC Asset Management Limited, and several high-value properties in Abuja, including plots located along the Outer Northern Expressway, Jahi, Sabon Lugbe, Kuje, Gaube Farmland Extension II Layout and Sector Centre B Layout, as well as a commercial property in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State.
According to the EFCC, investigations revealed that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities linked to the diversion of funds meant for the operations of the Joint Task Force, Operation Pulo Shield.
The anti-graft agency told the court that about N8.537 billion released for the military operation was allegedly diverted through a network of companies and individuals acting as proxies.
The Commission further alleged that billions of naira were paid to companies for contracts and services that were never executed, with substantial portions of the funds later used to acquire assets allegedly connected to Atewe through companies linked to him.
The EFCC’s investigation also traced N297 million to Cisco Nobots Limited, which was reportedly used in a property transaction in Port Harcourt. The Commission subsequently recovered N290 million from the transaction.
The Federal High Court had initially granted an interim forfeiture order before making it final after holding that Atewe failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the legitimate source of the assets.
Dissatisfied with the decision, the retired military officer approached the Court of Appeal, arguing that the forfeiture proceedings were incompetent because he was entitled to the protection of Section 123 of the Armed Forces Act, that the proceedings should not have commenced while criminal charges against him were still pending, and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application.
However, the appellate court resolved all the issues in favour of the EFCC.
The court held that the protections under Section 123 of the Armed Forces Act and the Supreme Court decision in General Jafaru Mohammed v. EFCC did not apply because Atewe had already retired from military service before the forfeiture proceedings commenced.
It noted that Atewe admitted his retirement in an affidavit filed before the trial court, stressing that the statutory protection under the Armed Forces Act is available only to serving military personnel.
The appellate court also held that Atewe failed to establish the legitimate source of the forfeited assets, observing that his explanations, which referred to honoraria, did not sufficiently demonstrate lawful acquisition.
On the argument that the civil forfeiture proceedings amounted to an abuse of court process because his money laundering trial was still pending, the court ruled that civil asset forfeiture and criminal prosecution are separate legal proceedings and can lawfully run concurrently.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal for lacking merit and affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court, clearing the way for the permanent forfeiture of the cash, investment holdings and properties to the Federal Government.
