The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled July 2, 2025, to deliver its ruling on an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seeking the final forfeiture of five additional properties allegedly linked to former Minister of Power Saleh Mamman. Mamman was convicted and sentenced in May to 75 years’ imprisonment for money laundering involving public funds.
Court sets date after hearing arguments
Justice James Omotosho fixed the date after listening to submissions from EFCC lawyer Abbas Muhammed and the defense counsel, Femi Atteh, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). The properties in question include Walijam Apartments at No. 43 Plot 435, Lobito Crescent, Wuse 2, Abuja; Bloom Luxury Suites Nigeria Limited at No. 5 Amana Crescent, New Estate, Unguwan Rimi, Kaduna State; a mansion at No. 11 Misratah Street, Wuse 2, Abuja; a mansion at No. 13 Misratah Street, Wuse 2, Abuja; and A.U.A Plaza at Plot 734 Kade Street, Wuse 2, Abuja.
The EFCC is seeking to add these assets to the list of properties already ordered forfeited to the federal government following Mamman's conviction. In his judgment on May 13, Justice Omotosho ordered the final forfeiture of properties in choice areas of Abuja and sums recovered in various currencies by the anti-graft agency.
EFCC lawyer argues court retains jurisdiction
During the proceedings, Muhammed informed the court that the EFCC had filed a motion on May 25 seeking a final forfeiture order, which had been served on the defense. He argued that although the court had convicted and sentenced Mamman, it retained jurisdiction to hear the forfeiture application. Muhammed noted that the court found that the former minister siphoned about N22 billion from the N33.8 billion involved in the charges against him. He added that the EFCC had recovered less than N2 billion despite previous forfeiture orders. “So this honourable court has the power,” he argued. He urged the court to assume jurisdiction and grant the application, asking for a consequential order forfeiting the properties to the federal government.
Regarding the appeal filed to challenge Mamman’s conviction, Muhammed said the appeal had not been entered and no appeal number had been assigned. He therefore urged the court to proceed with the forfeiture application.
Defense challenges court’s jurisdiction
On the other hand, Atteh confirmed receipt of the application and informed the court that the defense had filed a counter affidavit on June 5. He argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the forfeiture application because it had already delivered judgment in the criminal case. According to him, any attempt to forfeit properties after conviction should be pursued through a separate action. He contended that the court had become “functus officio” and could no longer determine the application, meaning its role in the criminal case ended once judgment was delivered. He also noted that an appeal had been filed to challenge the conviction.
Atteh further argued that some of the properties belonged to persons who were not parties to the criminal trial. “The question is, are these parties being given a fair hearing?” he asked, citing judicial authorities to support his argument that the court had completed its function. He urged the judge to dismiss the application for lacking merit.
Background on Mamman’s conviction and arrest
Justice Omotosho convicted Mamman on all counts on May 7 and sentenced him on May 13 to 75 years’ imprisonment for money laundering involving public funds. The judge also issued a warrant for his arrest after he repeatedly failed to appear in court, including during his conviction and sentencing. Following surveillance and intelligence operations, EFCC operatives arrested him on May 19 at a hideout in the Rigasa area of Kaduna State. The agency also arrested Shamsudeen Mohammed, a relative found with him.
When the EFCC brought Mamman to court on May 26, the judge ordered that he be remanded at the Kuje Custodial Centre to begin serving his sentence. On the same day, the court fixed June 8 for hearing of the EFCC’s application seeking forfeiture of the five additional properties. The judge said the date was fixed in the interest of fair hearing after being informed that defense lawyer Mohammed Ahmed had left the courtroom without notifying either the court or the prosecution.
Affidavit describing conviction as ‘emotional outburst’ struck out
Earlier, Atteh sought the court’s permission to address an affidavit of facts filed on May 22 by Mohammed Ahmed, a lawyer in his chamber. The affidavit had described the judgment convicting Mamman as an “emotional outburst,” prompting Justice Omotosho to summon Ahmed on June 10 to explain the statements.
On Wednesday, Atteh apologized to the court on behalf of Ahmed. He said he was not present when the affidavit was filed but accepted responsibility as head of the defense team. “I want to apologise on this and I want your lordship to grant a pardon to us,” he said. He further asked the court to allow the defense to withdraw the affidavit and strike it out. The prosecution did not oppose the request.
Although the judge expressed uncertainty about whether Atteh was aware of the affidavit when it was filed, he directed that Ahmed be given an opportunity to address the court. However, Atteh informed the court that Ahmed was absent due to indisposition, adding that his absence was not intended to disobey the court’s order. The judge subsequently granted the application and struck out the affidavit.
