Ike Ekweremadu, the embattled former vice president of the senate, claimed on Thursday before Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was to blame for his difficulties while he was being held in detention in London for alleged organ harvesting.
The Senator, who has been detained in London over an alleged organ harvest, claimed before the Federal High Court that the EFCC sent a letter to the London court, which prevented the foreign court from granting him bail, and that the letter was the reason for his detention. In a request for the court to set aside an interim order granted in favor of the Federal Government for confiscation of his 40 properties in Nigeria and outside the country, Ekweremadu made the claims detailed in this sentence.
Ekweremadu stated in the application submitted by his attorney, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), that the EFCC withheld information and facts pertaining to the assets, hence the forfeiture order was improperly issued to the Federal Government.
The imprisoned Senator said, specifically, that the EFCC had deceitfully secured the forfeiture judgment for the government by hiding the fact that the 40 properties were the subject of an inquiry dating back to 2008.
Ekweremadu claimed that the EFCC knew he was being held in London when the application for forfeiture of the properties was made and contended, among other things.
He said that the anti-graft agency purposefully chose not to inform the court that he was being held in jail in London and would not be able to counter the forfeiture request.
Therefore, Ekweremadu asked the court to reverse the forfeiture ruling and halt further action in the case until he is finished with his struggle with the London Court.
Silvanus Tahir (SAN), the EFCC’s attorney, refuted claims that the organization was responsible for Ekweremadu’s suffering.
He acknowledged that the EFCC wrote the London Court in response to a specific request, but insisted that sharing material that would be useful to one another was usual for anti-graft organizations.
Tahir did not oppose the motion for a stay of proceedings till Ekweremadu properly resolve his dispute before the London Court; nevertheless, vigorously opposed the request for setting aside the forfeiture order.
After hearing from the parties, Justice Ekwo set the date for the decision as January 25 of the next year.
