A federal capital territory (FCT) high court in Apo has dismissed an application filed by Godwin Emefiele, the former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), seeking to reclaim an estate seized by the federal government.

On December 2, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)secured the final forfeiture of an estate in the FCT.

The estate, located at Plot 109, Cadastral Zone CO9, Lokogoma District, covers 150,500 square metres in the country’s capital and contains 753 duplexes.

Although the estate was initially linked to a company that later denied ownership, Emefiele, through his lawyer, A.M. Kotoye, filed a motion as an interested party in the suit.

The former CBN governor sought an extension of time to apply to set aside the interim and final forfeiture orders made by the court in December 2024.

Emefiele contended that the entire forfeiture process was conducted without his knowledge and alleged that the EFCC published the interim forfeiture notice in an obscure section of a newspaper, making it difficult for him to respond timely.

According to him, he had been standing trial in three separate criminal cases across different courts in Abuja and Lagos during the period, making it impossible for him to discover the publication.

He also accused the EFCC of deliberately concealing the forfeiture proceedings, despite the agency’s frequent interactions with him on other pending charges.

However, in his ruling, Jude Onwuegbuzie, the presiding judge, held that although the principle of functus officio—which means a court becomes powerless after delivering judgment— was raised, the court still had the authority to revisit its decisions under certain conditions.

The judge pointed out that section 17(2) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, clearly outlines the notice requirements for forfeiture proceedings.

He rejected Emefiele’s claim that the publication was obscure, noting that the half-page notice in a national newspaper was sufficient and could not reasonably be described as hidden.

Onwuegbuzie emphasised that only individuals with a demonstrable interest in forfeited property are entitled to challenge such proceedings, similar to the rules guiding applications to join ongoing lawsuits.

The judge held that Emefiele had been given an adequate opportunity, spanning over 14 days, to contest the forfeiture but failed to do so.

Consequently, the judge dismissed his motion and ruled in favour of the EFCC.