*Contentious UK Property Remains Unclaimed After Interim Forfeiture Notice, Says CCB
*Bureau Seeks Final Forfeiture To FG
THE Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), has taken over the prosecution of the criminal case brought against Mike Ozekhome (SAN) by the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC).
This development, on Monday, January 26, stalled Ozekhome’s planned arraignment before a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) on the three-count charge filed against him by the ICPC for alleged forgery, among others.
When the case was called, the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation (DPPF), Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), said he was representing the AGF and informed the court of the AGF’s decision to take over the case from the ICPC, acting under his powers as provided in Section 174 of the Constitution.
Both ICPC’s Counsel, Osuebeni Akpomisingha, who filed the charge, and former AGF, Kanu Agabi (SAN), who led a team of lawyers, including 15 SANs, for the defence, did not object to the take over of the case by Fagbemi.
Upon an application for adjournment by Oyedepo, which was not opposed by Agabi, Justice
Peter Kekemeke adjourned until February 24 for arraignment.
The charge read: “That you, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN (M) ’68yrs’ of No. 53, Nile Street, Maitama, Abuja, sometime in August 2021 or thereabout at Abuja within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, while being a legal practitioner and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, did make a false document, to wit: Nigeria passport A07535463, bearing the name of Mr. Shani Tali, with intent to use same to support claim of ownership of property known and described as 79 Randall Avenue, London NW2 7SX, with intent to commit fraud, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 363 and punishable under Section 364 of the Penal Code CAP 532 laws of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, 2006.
Meanwhile, the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) said the contentious property in the United Kingdom (UK) owned by the late former minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Gen. Jeremiah Useni, remained unclaimed weeks after a newspaper publication invited anyone with a legitimate claim to it to step forward.
According to Premium Times, the property, located at 79, Randall Avenue, Neasden, Northwest London, gained public attention last year after a reported scandalous, failed effort by Ozekhome to claim it by allegedly presenting forged documents, including a Nigerian passport with the name of a fictitious personality, before a London tribunal to secure a transfer of ownership of the property to himself.
In November last year, CCB obtained an order of a Federal High Court in Abuja to freeze the property, allegedly being shadily acquired in 1993 by Useni, who died in France in January last year.
The Bureau, charged with the responsibility of ensuring asset declaration of public officers and enforcement of other provisions of the code of conduct for public officers, sought to secure an order of final forfeiture of the property to the federal government.
While issuing the order of interim forfeiture in November last year, the court, presided over by Justice Binta Nyako, directed the publication of the order in a newspaper to invite whoever was interested in the property to come forward to prove legitimate acquisition.
However, at the end of the 14-day period, CCB reported told the court on Monday, January 26, that “no person or entity has come forward to claim the property or establish any legitimate interest.”
In an application filed on December 22, last year, seeking the final forfeiture of the property, its Counsel, Sufyan Ahmad, relying on the affidavit filed in support of the motion, sworn by a CCB investigator, Raji Rasaq, argued that the property was reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity under Sections 17 and Section 19 of the Proceeds of Crime (Recovery and Management) Act (POCA), 2022.
The forfeiture proceedings, initiated in November last year via an ex parte application for the freezing of the property, listed the administrators of Useni’s estate, executors of his estate and the property at No. 79, Randall Avenue, Neasden, London NW2 7SX, as respondents.
The affidavit recalled that the court earlier granted “an interim order for the preservation of the property on 28 November 2025 and directed that the order be published, allowing any person or authority, whether corporate or otherwise, to indicate interest and file the necessary process to show why the property should not be forfeited to the Federal Government.”
He, however, submitted that “no person or authority had indicated interest or filed any process” contesting the forfeiture.
However, Premium Times reported that scheduled hearing in the suit stalled on Monday over CCB’s failure to properly serve the motion for final forfeiture and the hearing notice on the respondents.
While Ahmad appeared for the CCB, no lawyer appeared for the respondents. He informed the court that the motion for final forfeiture was duly served on the respondents and the proof of service filed accordingly.
But Justice Nyako asked the lawyer how the court documents were served, and Ahmad explained that the court bailiff served it on the late Useni’s properties listed in his assets declaration form in Jos, Plateau State, but was told he was no longer there.
He said his team got the address of the deceased’s daughter in Abuja and the court documents were served on her.
The Judge asked Ahmad if the daughter was the “administrator of the estate” listed on the motion on notice, and if he was aware of Useni’s Will, the lawyer responded in the negative to both questions.
Justice Nyako, who criticised the service of the documents, said Ahmad should apply for substituted service, so that anyone with an interest in the matter, particularly the third respondent, could join issues.
She subsequently adjourned the matter until February 25, for mention.
In August 2021, Ozekhome sought to register the property in question in his name, claiming it was a gift from a man identified as Shani Tali.
The UK First‑Tier Tribunal later found the claim fraudulent, ruling that the property belonged to the late Useni and that documents used to support Ozekhome’s claim were forged.
Following the UK judgment, the ICPC opened an investigation after a petition alleged that Ozekhome conspired with others to use forged Nigerian documents to claim ownership.
On January 16, the Commission filed three charges against Ozekhome at the FCT High Court in Maitama, Abuja, alleging that he unlawfully received the property, forged a Nigerian passport in Shani Tali’s name and used it to support his claim.
The CCB is seeking final forfeiture order after no person or entity came forward to show cause or establish any legitimate interest in the property within the expired 14 days notice, following the UK tribunal’s judgment confirming that Useni was the true owner of the property, having purchased it under a fictitious name.
Rasaq stated that the judgment also established that the alias used was intended to conceal the identity of the beneficial owner and suppress official documentation, adding that the deceased acquired the property during his tenure in public office, and the circumstances strongly indicated that the funds used were from unlawful activity.
He said the CCB obtained the remuneration package for political, public and judicial officers from the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), the government agency responsible for determining such salaries, to conduct a net worth analysis of the deceased while in service.
The investigator also disclosed that a net worth analysis conducted by the Financial Investigation and Forensic Accounting Unit (FIFAU) of the CCB, using the salary scale provided by the RMAFC, found that the deceased’s declared income at the time was grossly insufficient to account for the acquisition of the property.
According to him: “There is a substantial unexplained funds gap, indicating that the funds used for the acquisition must have come from other, undisclosed or undeclared sources.
“This gap constitutes a strong circumstantial indicator of potential fraud, unreported income or illicit accumulation of wealth.
“Accordingly, the means of acquisition of the London property constitutes proceeds of unlawful activity.”
In addition, Rasaq noted that his office reviewed the deceased’s asset declaration forms, in which he declared ownership of the property, which is already annexed as Exhibit B in the earlier application, even though it was purchased under a fictitious name.
He said there were reasonable grounds to believe that the property constituted the proceeds of unlawful activity, as indicated by the FIFAU analysis, and that it would be in the overriding interest of justice for the court to grant a final forfeiture order in favour of the federal government.
