Alleged Criminal Bribery: Court Allows Diezani to Present UK Acquittal Judgment in EFCC Case

Former Minister of Petroleum, Diezani Alison-Madueke, has secured a legal victory in her ongoing battle with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), after a Federal High Court in Abuja allowed her to present fresh evidence tied to her recent acquittal in the United Kingdom.

The ruling was delivered on Wednesday by Justice Inyang Ekwo, who granted an application seeking permission for Diezani to submit documents relating to her discharge by a UK court.

The fresh application was moved by her counsel, Godwin Iyinbor. The EFCC, represented by Mofesomo Oyetibo (SAN), did not oppose the request.

The development marks a significant turn in the legal dispute between the former minister and the anti-graft agency over assets previously linked to her and forfeited to the Federal Government.

At the centre of the case is Diezani’s attempt to recover assets that were seized and later listed for public auction by the EFCC. She had approached the court to challenge the agency’s actions, arguing that her rights were violated in the process.

Her suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/21/2023, names the EFCC as the sole respondent.

During Wednesday’s proceedings, both parties informed the court that they had regularised their filings.

Following that, Iyinbor requested permission to move a motion filed on June 25. He told the court the application was necessary to introduce a major development that occurred after earlier processes had already been filed.

According to him, the new evidence relates to Diezani’s acquittal by the Southwark Crown Court in London on June 17.

The UK court had discharged the former minister in a criminal bribery case brought against her.

Her legal team argued that the acquittal is relevant to the issues currently before the Abuja court and should be considered in the interest of justice.

The application specifically sought leave to file a further affidavit to present this new development and also asked the court to recognise the filing as properly submitted.

When asked for the EFCC’s position, Oyetibo acknowledged receipt of the application.

Although he argued that the motion could amount to unnecessary delay, he confirmed that the commission would not challenge it.

“They just want to bring to your lordship’s attention that the applicant has been exonerated in UK,” Oyetibo said.

Justice Ekwo then asked directly whether the anti-graft agency intended to oppose the application.

After Oyetibo responded in the negative, the judge granted the request.

The court subsequently adjourned the matter until October 6 for hearing.

Justice Ekwo also ruled that both the EFCC’s preliminary objection and the substantive case would be heard together on the next adjourned date.

In court filings, senior lawyer Mike Ozekhome, who is also representing Diezani, argued that the former minister’s case is largely centred on the legality of the EFCC’s actions.

According to him, the anti-graft agency moved to dispose of her properties without securing a criminal conviction and without fully observing due process.

“A major plank of the applicant’s case before this honourable court is that the respondent had sought to visit the applicant with grave proprietary consequences without conviction, without fair hearing, and without strict compliance with the relevant statutory provisions regulating forfeiture, management and disposal of properties.”

Ozekhome further argued that the UK acquittal strengthens Diezani’s position, especially on issues relating to fair hearing, due process and the legality of permanently depriving a person of property without conviction.

He stated that the foreign judgment is not being introduced to override Nigerian proceedings, but rather to place important new facts before the court.

“After the filing of the applicant’s processes and while this suit was still pending before this honourable court, a subsequent and material event occurred, to wit: the applicant was acquitted by the Southwark Crown Court, London, United Kingdom, on 17th June, 2026, of criminal allegations of bribery brought against her, a proceeding of obvious material relevance to the allegations repeatedly referenced in relation to the applicant.”

He added that the judgment was not available when earlier court processes were filed and should now be considered as part of the ongoing proceedings.