Ekweremadu: Son blames EFCC for father’s ordeal in UK, seeks reversal of forfeiture order

Lloyd, first son of Ike Ekweremadu, former deputy speaker of the senate, has accused the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of being behind his father’s continued detention in the UK.

The former deputy senate president and Beatrice, his wife, are facing charges bordering on conspiracy to arrange/facilitate the travel of another person with a view to exploitation, namely organ harvesting.

They were arrested by the London Metropolitan Police in June and appeared before a magistrate court in July.

Ekweremadu’s wife was granted bail on July 22, but the senator’s request was denied.

The police had alleged that David Ukpo, the reported victim at the centre of the organ harvesting allegation, is a 15-year-old but the court ruled that he is 21.

On November 4, Inyang Ekwo, judge of a federal high court in Abuja, ordered the interim forfeiture of properties reportedly linked to the lawmaker.

The judge ordered the anti-graft agency to publish the interim forfeiture in a national daily within seven days from the date of the order.

The interim forfeiture order includes 10 properties in Enugu, three in the United States, two in the United Kingdom, one in Lagos, nine in Dubai, and 15 in the federal capital territory.

Persons interested in the properties were advised to approach the court within 14 days of the publication and show why they should not be permanently forfeited to the federal government.

Consequently, the Anambra state government and Uni-Medical Healthcare Limited appeared before the court on December 5 as parties interested in some of the seized properties.

Lloyd, in a motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1242/2022 and filed by Adegboyega Awomolo, his lawyer, prayed the court for an order setting aside the interim forfeiture order.

In the motion predicated on four grounds, Llyod averred that the EFCC, in their ex-parte originating motion, “deliberately and fraudulently omitted very critical facts/evidence, which negate the granting of the application”.

He argued that the motion was brought in bad faith, adding that it constitutes an abuse of judicial process, which is “oppressive, intimidating and unfair” to the parties involved.

“The originating motion ex-parte was initiated with the expectation that Sen. Ike Ekweremadu and other persons interested in the property be denied of their right to fair hearing,” he said.

He alleged that the EFCC wrote a letter to the London court that made the court refuse to admit his father to bail.

“That at the respondent (EFCC)’s letter to the Metropolitan Police, supported the prosecuting authority’s opposition to my father’s bail application, which was refused,” the supporting affidavit reads in part.

Among others, he alleged that the EFCC was fully aware that his father was in detention in London when the application for forfeiture of the properties was filed.

He said the anti-graft agency deliberately refused to disclose to the court that his father was in detention in UK and would not be able to counter the forfeiture request.

He, therefore, prayed the court to set aside the forfeiture order and stay proceedings on the matter until his father’s ordeal in the UK is resolved.

Meanwhile, the EFCC, through its counsel, Silvanus Tahir, refuted the claim that it was responsible for Ekweremadu’s detention in the UK.

Tahir acknowledged that the agency wrote the UK court in response to a particular request, but claimed that sharing information that is advantageous to both parties is standard procedure for anti-corruption organisations across the globe.

EFCC said it was not opposed to Ekweremadu’s plea to halt the proceedings until he returned, but countered the bid to have the interim forfeiture order overturned.

The court has fixed January 25 for ruling on the suit.