The Special Adviser on Media to the Deputy President of the
Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, Mr. Uche Anichukwu, has thrown more
light on the legal contention between the Senator and the Special
Investigation Panel on Recovery of Public Property, explaining that
it was not primarily about ownership of properties, most of which
he said, were fictitious.
He said the senator was instead challenging impunity, smear
campaign, and an unfolding sinister agenda informed by the politics
of 2019 elections.
Anichukwu said it was against natural justice for lawyers of the
All Progressives Congress (APC), extraction to constitute
themselves into a panel to try members of the opposition, relying
on Decree 3 of 1984, now known as the Recovery of Public Property
(Special Provisions) Act, 2004.
He noted that not only was the law already overtaken by the Code
of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, 2004, but that the panel was
also not gazetted in any publication in the Federal Government of
Nigeria gazette or inaugurated by the president.
“So, considering the senator’s ordeals since his re-emergence as
the Deputy Senate President in 2015, and with 2019 election
fast-approaching, no one needs any soothsayer to know that the
federal government is up to something more sinister and diabolical
of which the asset forfeiture lawsuit is a launchpad.
He explained: “As earlier clarified by the senator, the list
contains so many fictitious and repeated properties generated by
the dismissed Chief Judge of Enugu State, Justice Innocent
Umezulike, who, in his capacity as the Chief Judge of the state in
2016, colluded with his lawyer, Mr. Tagbo Ike, and some
politicians, to steal and doctor his will. They then churned out
petitions to many government agencies.
“Should proper investigation devoid of bias and witch-hunt not
require that Ekweremadu be invited to respond to the petition,
assuming the panel had the constitutional powers to dabble into
matters relating to assets declaration?
“But the panel instead approached the court by way of motion
ex-parte, which would allow it obtain an interim forfeiture order
against the senator, without hearing him, just to achieve a maximum
smear effect.
“The fact that the petition was authored by a former chief
judge, who was sacked by the National Judicial Council (NJC) for
corruption and gross abuse of office and is currently facing
corruption trial at the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt and High
Court of Enugu State, was more reason his petition should have been
treated with wariness.
“Also, the fact that the Chairman of the panel, Okoi Ofem
Obono-Obla, signed, on behalf of the Attorney-General of the
Federation (AGF), the very letter referenced HAGF/ENUGU/2000/I and
dated February 4, 2016 directing the Inspector General of Police to
investigate Umezulike and the Director of Litigation over alleged
forgery of a court judgment and order in Suit No. E/170/76 dated
the June 25, 1985, is the more reason the panel should have been
circumspect.”
Anichukwu said simple verifiable matters were rather totally
ignored, citing the Congress Estate, which he said, did not exist
anywhere in Nigeria as well as the Kyami Layout plot, Abuja, which
he said Ekweremadu neither accepted nor paid for as required by
government’s offer letter in 2008.
He also explained that a thorough look at Ekweremadu’s assets
declaration form, which the panel obtained from the Code of Conduct
Bureau, could have shown that the House on Evans Enwerem Street,
Apo Legislators Quarters, was declared with the plot number by
which it was originally known and monetised to the senator.
“Besides, it is on record, as recently reported by some national
dailies, that the AGF had in a letter dated November 1, 2017 and
signed by the Solicitor-General of the Federation, withdrawn
notices of investigation, which Obono-Obla sent to some judges of
the Federal High Court, requesting them to fill assets declaration
forms all over in clear overreach of his purported powers.
“So, Ekweremadu’s case is treated differently because the main
purpose of the suit, which is another overreach by the panel, is to
intimidate, smear, and embarrass Ekweremadu to give the impression
that he illegally acquired and hid properties from the government,
which is clearly not the case,” Anichukwu concluded.
The Special Adviser on Media to the Deputy President of the
Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, Mr. Uche Anichukwu, has thrown more
light on the legal contention between the Senator and the Special
Investigation Panel on Recovery of Public Property, explaining that
it was not primarily about ownership of properties, most of which
he said, were fictitious.
He said the senator was instead challenging impunity, smear
campaign, and an unfolding sinister agenda informed by the politics
of 2019 elections.
Anichukwu said it was against natural justice for lawyers of the
All Progressives Congress (APC), extraction to constitute
themselves into a panel to try members of the opposition, relying
on Decree 3 of 1984, now known as the Recovery of Public Property
(Special Provisions) Act, 2004.
He noted that not only was the law already overtaken by the Code
of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, 2004, but that the panel was
also not gazetted in any publication in the Federal Government of
Nigeria gazette or inaugurated by the president.
“So, considering the senator’s ordeals since his re-emergence as
the Deputy Senate President in 2015, and with 2019 election
fast-approaching, no one needs any soothsayer to know that the
federal government is up to something more sinister and diabolical
of which the asset forfeiture lawsuit is a launchpad.
He explained: “As earlier clarified by the senator, the list
contains so many fictitious and repeated properties generated by
the dismissed Chief Judge of Enugu State, Justice Innocent
Umezulike, who, in his capacity as the Chief Judge of the state in
2016, colluded with his lawyer, Mr. Tagbo Ike, and some
politicians, to steal and doctor his will. They then churned out
petitions to many government agencies.
“Should proper investigation devoid of bias and witch-hunt not
require that Ekweremadu be invited to respond to the petition,
assuming the panel had the constitutional powers to dabble into
matters relating to assets declaration?
“But the panel instead approached the court by way of motion
ex-parte, which would allow it obtain an interim forfeiture order
against the senator, without hearing him, just to achieve a maximum
smear effect.
“The fact that the petition was authored by a former chief
judge, who was sacked by the National Judicial Council (NJC) for
corruption and gross abuse of office and is currently facing
corruption trial at the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt and High
Court of Enugu State, was more reason his petition should have been
treated with wariness.
“Also, the fact that the Chairman of the panel, Okoi Ofem
Obono-Obla, signed, on behalf of the Attorney-General of the
Federation (AGF), the very letter referenced HAGF/ENUGU/2000/I and
dated February 4, 2016 directing the Inspector General of Police to
investigate Umezulike and the Director of Litigation over alleged
forgery of a court judgment and order in Suit No. E/170/76 dated
the June 25, 1985, is the more reason the panel should have been
circumspect.”
Anichukwu said simple verifiable matters were rather totally
ignored, citing the Congress Estate, which he said, did not exist
anywhere in Nigeria as well as the Kyami Layout plot, Abuja, which
he said Ekweremadu neither accepted nor paid for as required by
government’s offer letter in 2008.
He also explained that a thorough look at Ekweremadu’s assets
declaration form, which the panel obtained from the Code of Conduct
Bureau, could have shown that the House on Evans Enwerem Street,
Apo Legislators Quarters, was declared with the plot number by
which it was originally known and monetised to the senator.
“Besides, it is on record, as recently reported by some national
dailies, that the AGF had in a letter dated November 1, 2017 and
signed by the Solicitor-General of the Federation, withdrawn
notices of investigation, which Obono-Obla sent to some judges of
the Federal High Court, requesting them to fill assets declaration
forms all over in clear overreach of his purported powers.
“So, Ekweremadu’s case is treated differently because the main
purpose of the suit, which is another overreach by the panel, is to
intimidate, smear, and embarrass Ekweremadu to give the impression
that he illegally acquired and hid properties from the government,
which is clearly not the case,” Anichukwu concluded.