By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The supreme court has affirmed the final forfeiture of properties and $2.045m linked to Godwin Emefiele, former governor of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), to the federal government.

In a unanimous judgment delivered on Friday, the apex court overturned the decision of the court of appeal in Lagos, which had nullified the forfeiture order.

The court held that the court of appeal erred when it overturned the forfeiture order and directed that the matter be reheard by the trial court.

On November 1, 2024, Deinde Dipeolu, judge of a federal high court in Lagos, ordered the permanent forfeiture of monies (including $2.045 million), seven choice landed properties and the two share certificates of Queensdorf Global Fund Limited Trust belonging to Emefiele, to the federal government.

The assets were said to be reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.

The forfeited properties include two fully detached duplexes of identical structures situated at No. 17b Hakeem Odumosu street, Lekki Phase 1, Lagos; an undeveloped land, measuring 1919.592 sqm with Survey Plan No. DS/LS/340 at Oyinkan Abayomi drive (formerly Queens drive), Ikoyi, Lagos; a bungalow at No. 65a Oyinkan Abayomi drive (formerly Queens drive), Ikoyi, Lagos and a four-bedroom duplex at 12a Probyn road, Ikoyi.

Others are an industrial complex under construction on 22 plots of land in Agbor, Delta state; eight units of an undetached apartment on a plot measuring 2457.60sqm at No. 8a Adekunle Lawal road, Ikoyi, and a duplex together with all its appurtenances on a plot of land measuring 2217.87sqm at 2a bank road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

In June 2025, the court of appeal in Lagos overturned the final forfeiture order issued on assets owned by Emefiele.

Two of the three-member panel of justices of the appellate court set aside the trial court’s judgment and ordered a retrial of the case at the lower court.

In the judgment delivered by Abdulazeez Anka, the court held that it was convinced that the legitimate earnings of Emefiele could acquire the properties.

Anka, however, noted that the appellant, did not contest the forfeiture of the $2,045,000 forfeited to the federal government.

The judge ruled that the money should be forfeited to the federal government.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Thursday, set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026, which nullified parts of the Independent National Electoral Commission’s electoral guidelines for the conduct of the 2027 general elections.

The appellate court, in a unanimous judgment, held that the Youth Party, which instituted the suit challenging the guidelines, lacked the locus standi to do so.

The lead judgment, prepared by Justice Adebukola Banjoko and read by Justice Okon Abang, held that the party failed to demonstrate how the guidelines affected it or its members in the conduct of its primary election or the submission of names of its candidates for the 2027 polls.

Justice Banjoko held that the Youth Party did not establish any injury arising from the guidelines to justify the institution of the suit.

The three-member panel further held that Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court erred when, on May 20, he nullified the guidelines on the grounds that they were inconsistent with some provisions of the Electoral Act, adding that the decision occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

In the May 20 judgment, Justice Umar had ruled that INEC lacked the constitutional and statutory powers to compel political parties to conduct their primaries within timelines fixed by the commission.

The trial court also nullified aspects of INEC’s timetable requiring parties to submit their membership registers and candidates’ particulars ahead of the timelines prescribed by the Electoral Act, holding that the commission could not lawfully abridge statutory timelines.

Dissatisfied with the decision, INEC appealed, arguing through its counsel, Dr Alex Izinyom, that the Federal High Court failed to determine its preliminary objection that the suit was hypothetical and academic, thereby denying the commission fair hearing.

The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal, and vacated the Federal High Court’s judgment, thereby restoring the validity of INEC’s electoral guidelines for the 2027 elections.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, has filed a N15 billion defamation suit against Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, over allegations that he demanded a 48 per cent kickback from a N27.3bn take-off grant approved for a federal agency.

In the suit, Gbajabiamila is seeking N10 bn in general damages, N5bn in aggravated damages, N200m as the cost of the action, and an order directing Matthew to publish a full retraction and apology in five national newspapers.

He is also asking the court to compel the defendant to pin the apology on all social media platforms and online channels where the alleged defamatory statements were published for 30 days.

The suit was filed by Gbajabiamila’s legal team from Pinheiro LP, led by Kemi Pinheiro, with Folu Oguntade, Olukayode Enitan and Chukwudi Enebeli, who described the allegations as false, malicious and defamatory.

According to the statement of claim, Matthew had alleged during a press conference that a dispute arose after Gbajabiamila purportedly demanded a 48 per cent kickback from the agency’s N27.3 bn take-off grant.

He also claimed that N400m had already been paid through a proxy allegedly acting for the Chief of Staff, while an additional N200m was required to secure presidential approvals.

However, Gbajabiamila denied ever meeting or communicating with Matthew or authorising anyone to act on his behalf.

“The claimant has never met the defendant, never held any meeting with him and has never authorised any intermediary, representative, agent or proxy to demand or receive money on his behalf,” the court filing stated.

The suit also referenced Adeyemi’s allegations concerning the death of one Babatunde Tanimola, whom he claimed acted as an intermediary between himself and the Chief of Staff.

Adeyemi alleged that Tanimola died in a hotel fire in Utako, Abuja, on October 22, 2025, a day after Gbajabiamila allegedly petitioned the police.

He further claimed he survived an assassination attempt along the Abuja-Kaduna Expressway in September 2025 and alleged that a “directive from above” instructed the Department of State Services and the Nigeria Police Force to discontinue efforts to recover his stolen mobile phones, which he said contained vital evidence.

Court documents revealed that Gbajabiamila’s solicitors issued a cease-and-desist letter dated July 6, 2026, which was published in THISDAY and other national newspapers on July 7, demanding an immediate retraction and apology.

Rather than withdraw the allegations, the claimant alleged that Adeyemi granted an interview to social media influencer VeryDarkMan, where he made admissions that contradicted his earlier claims.

According to Gbajabiamila’s witness statement on oath, Adeyemi admitted during the interview that he had never met the Chief of Staff in person, never held a video call with him, and had no independent means of verifying the identity of the individual he believed to be Gbajabiamila.

The claimant said Adeyemi further admitted that all communications were conducted through the late Tanimola.

Gbajabiamila also told the court that Adeyemi stated he could neither say the Chief of Staff was lying nor confirm that he was telling the truth, adding that he intended to submit his documents to law enforcement agencies for verification.

Despite those admissions, Gbajabiamila alleged that Adeyemi repeated the allegations during an appearance on Politics Today on Channels Television on July 13, 2026.

The court filings further disclosed that Adeyemi was already standing trial before the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/652/2026: Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew & others, over allegations involving forged presidential documents and forged appointment letters.

According to the claimant, those documents formed the basis of Matthew’s public allegations against him.

The FCT High Court has directed Adeyemi, whose address was listed as unknown but who is deemed to be within the court’s jurisdiction, to enter an appearance within 14 days after being served with the originating processes, failing which judgment may be entered against him in default.

In his witness statement, Gbajabiamila maintained that he had never met Matthew or had any personal, official or professional dealings with him.

He denied demanding any kickback, receiving N400m through a proxy, requesting an additional N200m, abusing his office, manipulating security agencies, intimidating media organisations or interfering with investigations involving the defendant.

He also denied instructing the Nigeria Police Force, DSS, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, or any other law enforcement agency to harass or investigate Matthew.